After suggestions by Glenn Maynard, I rewrote most of the document to make
it simpler and remove redundancies that were repeated over and over ;-
I repeat my point: repeated exposure to American legal texts is bad for
non-native speakers ;-)))
The first two questions were merged into a
O Mércores, 20 de Abril de 2005 ás 11:20:36 -0300, Humberto Massa escribía:
s/software/programs and\/or libraries/g
Darn, I had managed to avoid it in the previous version :-)
--
Jacobo Tarrío | http://jacobo.tarrio.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
O Mércores, 20 de Abril de 2005 ás 14:53:18 +, MJ Ray escribía:
Q: Shouldn't we allow documents which describe standards or
personal opinions to be non-modifiable? Why should we need the
same freedoms as for programs?
That's a good one (although I don't like the last question very much,
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 02:53:18PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Finally, if there were any reasons to allow such a restriction in documents,
these reasons would allow it in programs too. For example, qmail's license
forbids distributing modified versions of it, since its author believes that
his
4 matches
Mail list logo
