[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: free vs. non-free debate

Guylhem Aznar wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 06:26:41PM +0000, cogNiTioN wrote:
> > I feel that the Linux Documentation Project has a responsibility to
> > document Linux, as much of it as possible. Otherwise rename it the GNU
> > doc. project, or something.
> The GNU project provided most of what's now used in GNU/Linux operating
> system.

I'd like to see that documented. Last time I saw it attempted
(sorry, lost the source) FSF-held GNU copyrighted software made
up much less than 50 percent of a typical Linux distribution.
By "GNU project" I assume you mean parts of the official GNU,
not things covered by the GNU copyright license.

> However, since a clear majority wants documentation for non-free
> software, what about links in a separate section, as Scot Wilcoxon
> suggested, to separate free and non-free?

I strongly disagree here. Alrady it is hard as it is to make
users fid the LDP documentation; spreading it out between
free, non-free and oither categories makes this a mess.

Now looking at what may be considered less than utterly open:
- 3Dfx HOWTO            commercial hardware
- AI-Alife HOWTO        some commercial products mentioned
- Alpha HOWTO           commercial hardware
- PalmOS HOWTO          comercial OS
- WordPerfect mini-HOWTO        comercial
 ...and more.

I cannot see much of a problem here, and if Microsoft decided
to write a HOWTO for WfL I would not reject it out of hand. We
should be rational about this and keep the end user needs in

   Stein Gjoen

(Oh yes, I do mention some comercial products in my Multi Disk
HOWTO too. Tsk tsk)

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org