[Sussex] Distros

[Simon Huggins]

'ello Geoffrey

On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 06:50:57PM +0100, Geoffrey J. Teale wrote:
> You're absolutely right, I already pointed that out (though not the
> quote).  The things is that "propaganda" is the spirit embodied in the
> license under which  the software is licensed.  There is no
> requirement to actually include the manifesto, it's just suggested as
> a good idea to help spread the message that makes all this software
> available.  I don't see why you would be anti the idea?

Quoting Matthew Garret:
	 If I submit a patch to GCC including documentation with an
	 invariant section describing why "Open Source" is a preferable
	 term to "Free Software", the invariant section must be included
	 if my documentation is to be used. Theoretically, this may not
	 be an issue - pragmatically, it results in a situation where a
	 patch under the same license as the original documentation
	 cannot be accepted.

Simon

-- 
... "How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers are for. I
    only coded it" - Linus Torvalds