Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
bison-doc non-free
I see this as a growing problem with GNU. The 'GNU freedom' seem to become less and less free. I used to be a GNU follower but I'm not so much anymore. Stallman's view on freedom is starting to look a bit twisted to me.
Like the GFDL. It started out fine but then RMS & Co decided it was a bit too free so they incorporated the 'invariant sections' clause, basically removing the freedom. So if I want to use some of the 'free' documentation belonging to the GNU project I'm forced to beg for money to the GNU project because that is in the invariant part.
And we see the same thing happening to the GPL. V2 was too free (FSF called it loopholes) so they are working on a more restrictive license defining a hole bunch of things you can not do with the work released under it. I'm kinda with Linus on this one; disallowing certain use is really not freedom.
But I'm not a fanatic, I'm not even sure I care all that much any more. Whatever small programs I make I release under the GPL, mostly because I'm too lazy to research a better one. I like the idea of free software, but forced freedom is not real freedom. And if I one should stumble over some of my work in a non-free thing I don't think I would loose any sleep over it because my original work would still be there as free as ever...
I'll stop rambling now...
Tina
Like the GFDL. It started out fine but then RMS & Co decided it was a bit too free so they incorporated the 'invariant sections' clause, basically removing the freedom. So if I want to use some of the 'free' documentation belonging to the GNU project I'm forced to beg for money to the GNU project because that is in the invariant part.
And we see the same thing happening to the GPL. V2 was too free (FSF called it loopholes) so they are working on a more restrictive license defining a hole bunch of things you can not do with the work released under it. I'm kinda with Linus on this one; disallowing certain use is really not freedom.
But I'm not a fanatic, I'm not even sure I care all that much any more. Whatever small programs I make I release under the GPL, mostly because I'm too lazy to research a better one. I like the idea of free software, but forced freedom is not real freedom. And if I one should stumble over some of my work in a non-free thing I don't think I would loose any sleep over it because my original work would still be there as free as ever...
I'll stop rambling now...
Tina