On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote: > Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions? > Why isn't it enough to worry about the license?
Because software isn't documentation? Think of it this way: national security would be so much easier to maintain if we could just define cryptography as a weapon of war, equivalent to a nuclear device, "for the purposes of the import regulations". We all know how well that worked. Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be software "for the purposes of the DFSG". But does it make sense? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
