Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Front page to wiki now modifiable again

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Andrew Suffield <address@hidden>

    > > Well, what is _your_ definition of "free", since you think it is
    > > applicable as a touchstone which must be used to test any FSF
    > > licensee?

    > Here it is:
    > 
    > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

    > Clear, precise, and decidedly acceptable. Minus the hippie stuff, it's
    > the first test usually applied to any license under review to test
    > whether it is free enough for Debian (the DFSG is essentially this
    > written more explicitly, plus some pragmatic restrictions).

    > RMS has acknowledged that the GFDL is not free under this definition.

But that definition applies to _software_.  The freedoms enumerated
directly pertain to software (for example, you can not "run"
documentation).

Would you apply the definition in that essay to a political essay?  or
to a musical recording?   If so, can you elaborate on the analogy you
have in mind and why it is a good idea?   Oh, and, yes, manuals, too.

-t