Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > >> On Feb 09, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Has anyone come forward and said "I was deceived by GR 2004-03"? I > >> Yes, multiple people did. HTH. > > Who? I can't recall any. Can you provide pointers?
There was a rather heated debate at the time, I recall. > What did they say in response to questions like "did you read the > changes?" As someone who carefully read and then voted for the changes, I was rather taken aback by the (unforeseen, by myself and many others) implications of the changes. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "deception", however; the text of the changes was quite clear. After considering it carefully, I would still have voted the same way, and hence I voted to keep the changes in the second vote. Several folks seem to wish to re-ignite the debate of whether or not the changes were "editorial" or not. Whether it was or was not, it's now over and done with. This GR is a separate, albeit related, issue. I'm still not entirely convinced that all documentation needs the same set of freedoms as programs. But the intersection of the freedoms we require of "documentation", and the freedoms we require of "programs" gives us a very large common set of freedoms, with just one or two considerations which might be specific to one or the other. Given the huge problems of defining what is and is not "documentation" or "programs", I'm still of the opinion that we should require and uphold the same set of freedoms of both, which obviously includes the ability to modify without restrictions on what is modifiable. Regards, Roger -- Roger Leigh Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
pgpt0PDGnb2Cj.pgp
Description: PGP signature