From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some ideas with Emacs Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:13:46 +0100 Message-ID: <87fti2s7dx.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <87d0dbszjn.fsf@mbork.pl> <8736e4titj.fsf@mbork.pl> <871rtoti9w.fsf@mbork.pl> <87v9qysxbb.fsf@mbork.pl> <87lfrusaxu.fsf@mbork.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="174428"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 27.0.50 Cc: VanL , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 02 23:15:19 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 1ibtyP-000j5H-C8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:15:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45098 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ibtyI-0007lV-FV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:15:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50735) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ibtxO-0007jo-LI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:14:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ibtxJ-0003ld-Q0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:14:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([195.110.48.8]:56356) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ibtxE-0003cc-MC; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:14:06 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B863FE6D77; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 23:14:00 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mojserwer.eu Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WVPPwaNbYble; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 23:13:57 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (jeden09-dwa27.echostar.pl [213.156.109.227]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01C8EE65B2; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 23:13:56 +0100 (CET) In-reply-to: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.110.48.8 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:243020 Archived-At: On 2019-12-02, at 22:19, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> Similarly, how/why would you list the differences for a translation of >>> the book (other than "translated from Foo by Bar")? >> This is a different thing - and most probably requiring a green light >> from the original author. > > Not being allowed to write (and share) a translation without the > author's explicit consent is a big downer. I'd consider this firmly on > the side of "not Free". I never said I want to write a "free" (as in FSF) book. (I wouldn't totally exclude such a possibility, though, it's just not my current plan.) My opinion is that "free" (as in "free software" and "free documentation") is a bad idea for books in general. IOW, while I probably could agree that CC-ND might be a bit too harsh, it is certainly better than GFDL (which is way too lax) in such a case. In yet another words, even if I decide to release my book under GFDL one day (assuming I manage to write it, which I consider quite probable - after all, I'm finishing work on a third book with me as a (co)author), I still think that at least for books better than mine GFDL is a bad idea. > I can agree that the author may not want to have his name directly > attached to the translation, but that's a far cry from disallowing > translations altogether. I didn't say "disallowing". I said "disallowing without an explicit consent". Have you heard the story about the infamous Swedish translation of LotR? While I would not compare any of my books (written or to-be-written) with that of master JRRT, this is an important cautionary tale. I can live with manuals/documentation which are not good literature (even though it's a pity, and I very much prefer ones that are well-written - see e.g. DEK's The TeXbook). Not so much for books (even if _my_ books are only mediocre literature at best). Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://mbork.pl