Glenn Maynard writes: >> I have not yet thought hard about how to "break" the wording above in >> the sense of there being some way to follow it that takes away what I >> would call an essential software freedom. > > The entire purpose of your proposed wording is to take away an essential > software freedom: the freedom to modify documentation and other things > that aren't "programs".
Don't be a tool. You asked for a proposal to allow non-free license texts. I offered one. You should have known in advance that I think other exceptions should be made. If you wanted a proposal that fit your wish list, you should have written one yourself. Michael
