My concerns about GPLv3 process

Alfred M. Szmidt ams at
Tue Jan 31 09:34:27 UTC 2006

   > I think *updating* the FDL is more important than updating the
   > GPLs.

   I concur.  The GFDL is suffering from a lot of practical problems
   and even didn't achieved its goal to foster publishing of free
   documentation as woodware.

>From what I know, and have read, the GFDL did achive the goal it tried
to achive. has the short
story, there might be more tidbits somewhere else.

   Even worse, GNU maintainers have been forced to change all
   documentation to the GFDL and only a few resisted and kept foing
   with the GPL.

Force and force... GNU maintainers agreed to follow the policies of
the GNU project, this is no different than say a Debian maintainer
being asked to follow Debian policies.  Say, excluding free
documentation even if they disagree with the policy to do so.

   We now have the so-called printer friendly GFDL and not to long ago
   the FSF gave up on GNU press and laid off the responsible
   editor. GFDL a success?

I strongly doubt that the two have anything in relation.

Note that I'm a supporter of the current GFDL, it does need some
clarifications (and simplifications, I find the license to long and to
complex), but none that are so grave that it is more important than
updating the GPL.


More information about the Discussion mailing list