On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:37:14 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> To me, the non-freeness added to developers (for a fork, for example) >> is more important than the inconvenience (or possible extra costs) to >> publishers. > If it leaves you no sensible way to publish your own manuals, the word > "freedom" seems to acquire a backward meaning. "If it leaves you no sensible way to copy between a program and its own documentation, the word "freedom" seems to acquire a backward meaning." Frankly, I think that the developers' freedom is more important than a publisher's minor inconvenience or added cost. And if that were the only reason for different license terms, IMHO the sensible thing to do would be either to license the documentation under a GPL + exceptions license, or to dual license. -- Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
