I'm sure this thread is killfiled/filtered by most by now, so I'll keep to points of information:
"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Did I claim that you did? No. You implied it on the other hand. I am not to blame for what you read between the lines of my emails. > Only if you stop cluttering the list with abusrd lies. TTBOMK, I have not lied. Your request is like "do you still deny that you beat children?" > If you wish to > know what happened, please ask the Savannah hackers. You have > obviously not done so, and instead of doing this, you went on a > personal crusade without knowing what actually happened. I did ask. Of course people are reluctant to admit errors. The usual tactic is to apply pressure while offering a good solution that doesn't make them admit any mistakes. Usually, I care more about the future than the past. > This isn't the first time you do this. Indeed. Nothing to be ashamed of. My estimates are often good. > > It's far from obvious to me why I should allow the BNP or whoever > > to print updated copies of a manual and forbid recipients from > > removing their manifesto from it, as FDL use would permit. > > This is clearly written at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-doc.html Not clearly. The justification there is mostly RMS's arbitrary and inconsistent beliefs and that's not enough. I think http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-gfdl.html is more the reasons, but my work is not for sale to the BNP for that low price. > > > And you can use the GPL if you would like to, just like with > > > licensing your work under the GPL. [...] > > > Can you use the GPL alone? It's my understanding that would be > > forbidden by the planned policy change. > > Please ask the Savannah hackers. I have. You're contradicting them. Why? > > If the FDL's not buggy, why do you refer to its problems in another > > email today? > > Please stop claiming things I didn't even imply. You have on a > repeated basis invented claims. It is silly, please stop it. You > were answering to a sentence where I wrote something along the lines > of `The GFDL does not have the problems that you claim it to have'. > The GFDL does have problems, but none of which you claim it to have. And you wrote that to object to me calling the FDL a known-buggy licence, so I concluded that you believed it has no known bugs. TTBOMK, I have not invented claims. Please stop making wild unsubstantiateable allegations all the time. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
