En réponse à "D. Goel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi Emacs users, > > > > There is an ongoing discussion on debian-legal about the license > of > > GNU Manuals. These manuals, an among them the GNU Emacs Manual, > > are licenses under GDFL but have invariant sections that are > > considered by Debian as non-free (if Debian decides to apply > > DFSG to documentation). I don't like the idea of seeing the GNU > > Emacs Manual going to non-free but I have to admit that Debian is > > acting the right way and fairly. > > There are already very few users who stay away from non-free in their > sources.list. > > I am sure almost no one consider FSF's manuals unfree just because > DSFG thinks they are, and that we all want to continue to use them, > whether or not these issues get resolved. IOW, most of these users > will continue to want to use these manuals.
I think so. Me at least. > The net effect of this will be to force these few users to add nonfree > into our sources.list.. which will make it very hard for us to find > out what is free what is not before installing it.. and only serve as > a huger inconvenience. Sure I guess. > > If you *have* to do this, until the situation is resolved with FSF, Not me. Debian as a whole. > can they atleast be put in a different section, say "nonfree-but-gnu" > (or abbreviated as "gnu"), so we can put that section in our > sources.list and still not have to put "nonfree" in our sources.list? I don't think people will accept to do this. -------------- Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
