> I think *updating* the FDL is more important than updating the > GPLs.
I concur. The GFDL is suffering from a lot of practical problems and even didn't achieved its goal to foster publishing of free documentation as woodware. >From what I know, and have read, the GFDL did achive the goal it tried to achive. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-doc.html has the short story, there might be more tidbits somewhere else. Even worse, GNU maintainers have been forced to change all documentation to the GFDL and only a few resisted and kept foing with the GPL. Force and force... GNU maintainers agreed to follow the policies of the GNU project, this is no different than say a Debian maintainer being asked to follow Debian policies. Say, excluding free documentation even if they disagree with the policy to do so. We now have the so-called printer friendly GFDL and not to long ago the FSF gave up on GNU press and laid off the responsible editor. GFDL a success? I strongly doubt that the two have anything in relation. Note that I'm a supporter of the current GFDL, it does need some clarifications (and simplifications, I find the license to long and to complex), but none that are so grave that it is more important than updating the GPL. Cheers. _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
