On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 03:42:24PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote: > Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 02:23:40PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote: > >> WHY-FREE is not documentation! it is a manifesto in which rms expounds > >> on his views on free software. it's _his_ opinion and as such it > >> should not be altered. this doesn't make it non-free. > >> this thread is getting weirder and weirder... > > If I can't change it, it's non-free. > > There's nothing "weird" about this simple, fundamental concept. > what's weird is people applying the free-software concept to things > other than software. What's weird is people arguing that an organization whose sole raison d'être is the distribution of *software* should argue for the continued inclusion of other things in Debian on the GROUNDS that they are not software. > you don't have the right to modify anybody's manifesto. if you > disagree with their ideas, write a rebuke. you only have the right to > modify _software_ licenced under the gpl. You're the one who's missed the point. The issue at hand is not whether we have a *right* to modify someone's manifesto; the license clearly states that we do not. The issue is whether we should be distributing such a document that we don't have the right to modify. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
pgpICmi9Q9Rvn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
