| |||||||||||||
Resolved: firmware is not softwareResolved: firmware is not softwarePosted Aug 24, 2006 2:11 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065)Parent article: Resolved: firmware is not software
Why aren't documents also "just data"? Is the GNU "Free" Documentation License now acceptable?
(Log in to post comments)
GFDL in Debian main Posted Aug 24, 2006 3:39 UTC (Thu) by jstAusr (guest, #27224) [Link] Currently GFDL documents -without- unmodifiable sections are considered free enough to be included in Debian main.http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg...
Resolved: firmware is not software Posted Aug 24, 2006 18:20 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] Documents are "just data"; it's documentation, which has a functional aspect tied to what it documents, which matter. Debian would be unable to function otherwise, since the GPL document itself is not Free ("but changing it is not allowed"), and not intended to be Free, and must be distributed with GPL-licensed packages.
Resolved: firmware is not software Posted Aug 30, 2006 22:36 UTC (Wed) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] Ok, I agree with what you said, but I still think the application of the rules isn't consistent. Don't binary firmware blobs have functional aspects too, so by that logic don't they need to be Free?
|
|||||||||||||