"Zak B. Elep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Read it, and I agree with it: the only thing I don't get is this:
> why don't they implement that in FDL 1.2? From what I've read, there
> is a lot of controversy regarding this and other whatnots: "Why You
> Shouldn't Use The GNU FDL" by Nathanael Nerode "Draft Debian
> Position Statement About The GNU Free Documentation License

I've recently struggled with the license issue, as planner.el now
comes with a rather neat mostly user-contributed texinfo file . Why
are licenses so darn annoying? I inherited the planner.el project as a
GPL-licensed thing, and I'm comfortable with the GPL, but figuring out
the acceptable licensing for documentation sometimes seems harder than
writing the documentation itself. Waaaah.

>> And what might that "precious natural resource" be?
> Take your pick: wetware, hardware, or software. i'm not even
> counting spyware among this...

I'd argue that wetware's the only thing that counts as natural, so
far. ;)

-- 
Sacha Chua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Ateneo CS faculty geekette
interests: emacs, gnu/linux, making computer science education fun
http://sacha.free.net.ph/ - PGP Key ID: 0xE7FDF77C
--
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph
Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph
.
To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug
.
Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to
http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie

Reply via email to