Please stop cc'ing me. Read the code of conduct.
On 2003-08-29 17:32:33 +0100 Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But describing a software is not the most interesting thing. While
describing and analysing a book is the most interesting thing you can
do with a book (apart from reading it, obviously).
I disagree. I think editing a book in all its many ways is the most
interesting thing, not describing and analysing it. Do you learn more
when you edit something, or when you read it? It's just not often
possible for you to do that.
You cut my message at the wrong place, where I explain why I say it's
pointless.
Sorry. I did read the rest of it, but I have to cut it somewhere and
that seemed like a good point. I don't agree that thinking about a
book is modifying it any more than thinking about a program is
modifying it. Maybe it is in a way, but it's not what we normally
mean.
In fact, with computer, we're forced to use licenses to get the rights
we already have with books.
Trade secrets are normally what prevents you from reading program
source, unless you are very good with assembler.
[...]
I think this GFDL issue a complete waste of time
Bye?
-- but I do talk
about it because it would piss me off to add non-free in my apt-get's
sources to get the manual of the free softwares I enjoy.
Maybe you should propose a "non-dfsg-doc" section and the necessary
modifications?
This is completely relevant to the subject "documentation eq
software?". If you're not interesting in this subject, you have the
right to stop feeding it.
I've already dismissed that as a straw man already discussed to death.
Let's retitle again, then...
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ jabber://[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
