Alex Romosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > WHY-FREE is not documentation! it is a manifesto in which rms expounds > on his views on free software.
It doesn't really matter whether it's documentation or not. The question is, is it free? > it's _his_ opinion and as such it > should not be altered. However, there is a difference between changing someone's opinion and editing a text that originally expressed someone's opinion, as the following edited quotation is intended to illustrate: > it's not _his_ opinion and as such it > should be altered. (I know you didn't say that.) > this doesn't make it non-free. How does that follow from the definition of "free" applicable in this context? http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines > this thread is getting weirder and weirder... It certainly is!
