Em Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:26:39 +0300, Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:02:47PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote: > > While I don't regard the DFSG as already applying to > > documentation, the spirit of it is naturally extended to cover > > documentation. I would suggest that the GFDL is a reasonable > > license to use for free documentation --- free as in 'free > > to use and modify', but also free as in 'free speech'. > > If the GFDL were a "free to use and modify" license, then we would not > be having this discussion. The problem is that the GFDL specifies > parts that we are _not_ free to modify, or even to delete. indeed, I would not like to see people modifying my points of view and redistributing saying that's what I think, you see > > Several people said that they didn't want Debian > > documentation to be full of political rants. They would > > like to reserve the right to delete the parts they don't > > like from the manuals they package. But what is this but > > censorship? And how is censorship compatible with liberty? > > What you're advocating is the evil twin of censorship, namely forced speech. I can't see why... are you forced to package anything? []s! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Gustavo Noronha <http://people.debian.org/~kov> Debian: <http://www.debian.org> * <http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
