On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:37:37AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 07:42:49PM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:21:58AM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
> > >
> > > It seems to me that there an awful lot of potential *practical*
> > > problems with invariant sections in documents.
> > >
> > > They may contain outdated, narrow, or even dangerous advice or
> > > code examples. For example: code fragments written against
> > > obsolete APIs in other packages, scripts which work with standard
> > > dev but not with udev, or insecure methods of temp file creation.
> >
> > GFDL doesn't allow these to be part of an invariant section.
>
> Of course it does. If you write a text about literature, and release it
> under the GPL, then your invariant section could explain how the set of
^^^
Ehh, please assume that said "GFDL". kthxbye.
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
