My concerns about GPLv3 process

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > 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.  http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-doc.html 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.

Cheers.