On 1/5/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > But not all documentation is attached to a software. For instance, if > > I write a book "Software development on Debian", releasing it under > > the GFDL is still the reasonable thing to do. > > It's reasonable if you want to attach adverts to it and allow others > to do so, while witholding the freedom to edit or remove those adverts. > > If one wants to forbid all changes, then releasing under a CC-nd > licence is. a reasonable action. Not free software, though, which is > what this list usually likes and a free software operating system > should have free software manuals. > I've been a Debian user for eight years. I can count on one hand the number of times I've used proprietary software in all of that time; well, unless you count helping people out by answering their (MS Windows or MAC OS) questions or looking over their shoulder. I'm also working with Wikipedia, CC, & FSF on licensing issues. I'm an academic scientist. I run a 70 processor cluster (Debian stable & OpenSSI.) I do synthetic biology. I work on Personal Genomics; my mentor's article about the work is the cover story for January's Scientific American. I hate proprietary academic publishing, so, I'd like to see a "pipeline" from Academic Wikis to Academic Journals to Wikipedia. That pipeline will almost certainly be GFDL/CC-BY-SA. It's really sad to see blood boil over these licenses. Since I am talking to people at FSF & CC regularly, I would be more than happy to bring Debian concerns to both groups in a, hopefuly, productive fashion. If there's a desire for that, just get in touch with me.
Thanks, and Happy New Year, Sasha PS. I'm often on AIM/Google Talk as "alexanderwait" and or Freenode as "asw" or "await". -- http://freelogy.org/wiki/User:AlexanderWait (GnuPG ID 4153 C516)