From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some ideas with Emacs Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:58:41 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87d0dbszjn.fsf@mbork.pl> <8736e4titj.fsf@mbork.pl> <871rtoti9w.fsf@mbork.pl> <87v9qysxbb.fsf@mbork.pl> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="200485"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: van@scratch.space, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Marcin Borkowski Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 03 05:59:25 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ic0HV-000q1t-4D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:59:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48474 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ic0HT-00051G-U4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:59:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47048) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ic0Gq-00050I-MQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:58:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50238) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ic0Gq-0004U9-AO; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:58:44 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ic0Gn-0003Ni-SQ; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:58:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87v9qysxbb.fsf@mbork.pl> (message from Marcin Borkowski on Mon, 02 Dec 2019 13:53:44 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:243031 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > A _manual_ should be e.g. comprehensive (i.e., cover the whole of its > subject). A _book_ on a subject does not have to be so. I see the distinction you are making, but it doesn't affect our stance. Our principles of free documentation apply to any works that we would distribute or recommend to help people learn to use the software. Whether it is a manual meant to be complete, or a book that treats any choice of topics, if it doesn't carry a free license we ought not to refer users to it in any way. What we ought to do is use or write some free documentation to explain the same methods and techniques. > Could you define "political points which are outside the practical topic > of the manual"? There is a precise criterion in the GFDL itself. > The FSF does refer to e.g. MS > Windows (in the Emacs manual, of all places). How is a CC-NC/CC-ND book > (not "manual"!!!) worse than that? The Emacs manual does not recommend using Windows. It refers to running Emacs on Windows to encourage Windows users to run Emacs. We consider it ok to mention the existence of Windows because we expect users already know about it. It is unlikely anyone will learn about the existence of Windows from the Emacs Manual and start using Windows as a result. See the section References in the GNU Coding Standards for the way we judge such questions. We have the motto that a nonfree program is worse than no program at all. What does this mean? It is clear that a nonfree program might be of some practical use, whereas a nonexistent program is of zero practical use. The point of this motto is precisely that we don't judge solely by practical use. Our goal is to win freedom, so we prize freedom over practical use. The nonfree program is not a contribution to the free world -- rather, it is a trap that we should help people climb out of. The same applied to documentation (manuals or not). Documentation simply means a work that teaches you how to use something. I think the book you have in mind would be documentation. Would you please make your book free, so that it contributes? > As an even more theoretical exercise, assume I wanted to write a book... > called "Memoirs of an Emacs user", which would be an artistic > representation of my process of Emacs and Org-mode gradually embracing > my life;-) - possibly including practical tips on Emacs usage? Would > you mind talking about it here? A book like this would not be documentation -- at least, mostly not. It would be a sort of memoir. I think CC-NC-ND is an acceptable license for a memoir, precisely because it is NOT documentation -- it does not have the purpose of teaching people practical skills or guiding them in doing a task. See https://gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-vs-community.html for more explanation. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)