lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: lynx-dev Re: Referring to non-free documentation for non-free softwa


From: Philip Webb
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Re: Referring to non-free documentation for non-free software
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:32:00 -0500 (EST)

990201 Kim DeVaughn wrote: 
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999, David Combs (address@hidden) said:
>> Richard Stallman announced:
>>> So I rewrote the text as follows:
       ^
does this mean RS can rewrite the rules as & whenever he pleases?
that's not exactly the rule of `laws, not men', is it?
       
>>> A GNU program should not recommend use of any non-free program,
>>> and it should not refer the user to any non-free documentation
>>> for free software.
>> QUESTION: in your rewritten text, those "should not" pairs;
>> do you mean "may not", or "should not"?
>> Or MAYBE you WANT to keep it ambiguous?
>> Thus leaving it up to a judge to decide what the intent was?
> Perhaps it all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is ... :-) ...
> "Stupid programmer tricks can be fixed with a new version.  Stupid judge
>  tricks have the force of law behind them, and aren't so easy to upgrade."

RS' new wording really does confirm BL's account of dealings with him.
thank God we never ditched the monarchy up here ...

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]