Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >He believes his invariant sections are an important soapbox for his free > >software philosophies. In an apparent contradiction, he feels it's a > >small price to pay if that makes the documentation non-free. > > Could we consider some invariant sections as "non-problematic"?
Well, they interfere greatly with derived works of documents (you can't merge in text into a derived work without also including the Invariants) whether the derived works are other manuals, a reference card, or context-sensitive help in Emacs (a pull-down menu for example). How you you create such a pull-down menu? I'd even argue that distributing Emacs that links into the Info document as it does now is not permitted by the Emacs license. It seeems to be a combined work with added restrictions beyond what the GPL allows. > >> But then, if we're seeking for enemies, I believe they > >> are not on GNU side ... > > > >I think we should be true to ourselves, in spite of whatever the FSF > >say. I think it's unfortunate that not only are they using a non-free > >license, but that they are promoting it as a free license. > > You are right if you considered such documentation as covered > by DFSG. This is the point of the debate. I think it's shortsighted to put documentation onto a pedestal out of the reach of software. What happens if I want to merge this documentation into software? Peter
