Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Thursday, Aug 7, 2003, at 07:01 US/Eastern, Lynn Winebarger wrote:
Then the intellectually honest approach is to say the guidelines are
for both software and documentation, not to say the set of software
contains
the set of documentation.
I'd like to know more about this "intellectual honesty" that compels the
word "software" to include documentation when used in the Social
Contract, but not when used a little further down the page[0] in the
guidelines.
Nowhere did I suggest that Debian must or even should distribute
documentation! Indeed it would seem Debian in violation of the 100%
criteria if software is interpreted in the normal manner.
It's interesting that the preamble refers to definitions of "free
software" and then goes on to give the DFSG to define "free" in
relationship to "software", rather than both.
Lynn
Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software
We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely
free software. As there are many definitions of free software,
we include the guidelines we use to determine if software is
"free" below....
[0] http://www.debian.org/social_contract.html
