Le mer 27/08/2003 à 16:33, Sergey Spiridonov a écrit : > Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > As far as I know, there is no such restriction in usage. It only limits > > Yes, I agree. What I want to point out is: GPL have restrictions > (limitations) on what you can do with the GPL code. So, it takes away > *some* freedoms.
Again, no, no and NO. What limitations are you talking about? > Debian users and maintainers agree with such limitations because they do > not need this freedom in most cases (the freedom to include GPL code > into the proprietary code and to distribute binary result). THIS - IS - NOT - A - LIMITATION . You can do *whatever you want* with GPL'ed code, technically speaking. Redistributing a modified version as a proprietary product, but there is no restriction on producing this version. Only a restriction on *how* you distribute it. > The same thing is with FDL. If Debian users and maintainers do not need > the freedom to remove political statements in most cases In most cases? So if we need a freedom only sometimes, we don't really need to be strict about it. Hey, most of our users don't modify the software we distribute, so why require they can? (Oops, it's exactly what you are asking for invariant sections.) > (for example > Manifesto from Emacs), they can agree with invariant sections in > documenation. The problem is not doing it. The problem is being able to do it. With your reasoning, we don't need any free software. > I believe in most cases we can agree with such a limitation. Oh, but we already agree with such limitations. In the non-free section. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
