Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 04:42:41PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >> Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > alternatively, print a single link to either the full documentation >> > (containing the invariant sections) or to just the invariant sections. >> >> This might be a reasonable thing, but it is not what the GFDL requires. > > actually, it is. the GFDL explicitly says that you can provide a link to > an internet site - and, contrary to loony zealot propaganda, it does not > say that you must operate or maintain that site yourself.
This provision allows you an exemption from the "Transparent copy" requirement; it does not allow you an exemption from the invariant sections requirements, as you note: > this is for Opaque copies, such as printed on paper or even the > apocryphal and much-whinged-about coffee cup. for Transparent copies, > it doesn't matter - even the most pedantic whinger is going to find it > hard to credibly claim that having to include some extra files in the > document or in an appropriate directory is a huge inconvenience. it's > not. quit yer whining and find something useful to do. A doc string in a GPL'd program is hardly irrelevant; or a reference card, or, for example, use in another manual. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
