From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta Subject: Re: Permission to use portions of the recent GNU Emacs Manual Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:02:12 -0500 Message-ID: <87k6rollef.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1102791761 22715 80.91.229.6 (11 Dec 2004 19:02:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Richard Stallman , Ben Wing Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 11 20:02:35 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CdCVn-0006qX-00 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 20:02:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CdCfn-0007TG-SE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:12:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CdCfg-0007Sz-GW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:12:48 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CdCff-0007Sg-SX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:12:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CdCff-0007Sd-QQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:12:47 -0500 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.74] (helo=tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CdCVL-0001Jd-Uw; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:02:08 -0500 Original-Received: from alfajor ([67.71.27.115]) by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20041211190207.HYNC2034.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:02:07 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E6DD0D730B; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:02:12 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Alan Mackenzie In-Reply-To: (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Sat, 11 Dec 2004 10:27:39 +0000 (GMT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:31009 gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta:17404 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:31009 > What is the purpose of the GFDL? I quote from the licence: "The purpose > of this License is to make a manual .... "free" in the sense of > freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and > redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or > noncommercially." Since the XEmacs team's freedom here is ineffective, > the GFDL is, on its own terms, broken. I have no real opinion on the GFDL, tho just because of the turmoil it has caused and is still causing, I guess I'm rather annoyed by it. But I think that this "freedom" argument is flawed. "Freedom" means something different to everyone, so it's not a very good way to convince other people. Especially in the context of the Free Software movement, I understand "free" to apply to the program itself, not its user: the program (or the doc) itself is "free", can't be harnessed/hijacked by anyone. It quite directly implies that people aren't "free" to use it as they please. I don't see any benefit from using the GFDL over the GPL that would justify the downside of preventing the XEmacs people from using our documentation. [ Unless we consider that as an upside, but I really don't see any good reason why we should be so antagonizing. ] Similarly, the licensing problems it can cause when extracting docs and doc-skeletons out of code is worrisome. Stefan