diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'examples/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | examples/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html | 177 |
1 files changed, 177 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..37099c70 --- /dev/null +++ b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd"> +<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. + +Free Software Foundation + +51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor + +Boston, MA 02110-1335 +Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. +Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted +worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is +preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations +of this book from the original English into another language provided +the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and +the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all +copies. + +ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 +Cover design by Rob Myers. + +Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. + --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 +texi2html was written by: + Lionel Cons <Lionel.Cons@cern.ch> (original author) + Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org> + Olaf Bachmann <obachman@mathematik.uni-kl.de> + and many others. +Maintained by: Many creative people. +Send bugs and suggestions to <texi2html-bug@nongnu.org> +--><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 9. Why Free Software Needs Free Documentation</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 9. Why Free Software Needs Free Documentation"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type="text/css"> +<!-- +a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none} +blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller} +pre.display {font-family: serif} +pre.format {font-family: serif} +pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif} +pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif} +pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} +pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller} +pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} +pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller} +span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;} +span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;} +ul.toc {list-style: none} +--> +</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> + +<a name="Free-Doc"></a> +<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></a></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Why-Free-Software-Needs-Free-Documentation"></a> +<h1 class="chapter"> 9. Why Free Software Needs Free Documentation </h1> + +<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-2"></a> +<a name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-1"></a> +<p>The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the +software—it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include +in these systems. Many of our most important programs do not come +with full manuals. Documentation is an essential part of any software +package; when an important free software package does not come with a +free manual, that is a major gap. We have many such gaps today. +</p> +<a name="index-Perl"></a> +<p>Once upon a time, many years ago, I thought I would learn Perl. I got +a copy of a free manual, but I found it hard to read. When I asked +Perl users about alternatives, they told me that there were better +introductory manuals—but those were not free. +</p> +<p>Why was this? The authors of the good manuals had written them for +<a name="index-O_0027Reilly-Associates"></a> +O’Reilly Associates, which published them with restrictive +terms—no copying, no modification, source files not +available—which exclude them from the free software +community. +</p> +<p>That wasn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to +our community’s great loss) it was far from the last. Proprietary +manual publishers have enticed a great many authors to restrict their +manuals since then. Many times I have heard a GNU user eagerly tell +me about a manual that he is writing, with which he expects to help +the +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-3"></a> +GNU Project—and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to +explain that he had signed a contract with a publisher that would +restrict it so that we cannot use it. +</p> +<p>Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we +can ill afford to lose manuals this way. +</p> +<p>Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not +price. The problem with these manuals was not that O’Reilly +Associates charged a price for printed copies—that in itself is +fine. (The +<a name="index-FSF_002c-and-selling-GNU-manuals"></a> +<a name="index-manuals_002c-GNU"></a> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-manuals"></a> +Free Software Foundation sells printed +copies of free GNU manuals, too.) But +GNU manuals are available in source code form, while these manuals are +available only on paper. GNU manuals come with permission to copy and +modify; the Perl manuals do not. These restrictions are the problems. +</p> +<p>The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free +software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms. +Redistribution (including commercial redistribution) must be +permitted, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program, +on line or on paper. Permission for modification is crucial too. +</p> +<p>As a general rule, I don’t believe that it is essential for people to +have permission to modify all sorts of articles and books. The issues +for writings are not necessarily the same as those for software. For +example, I don’t think you or I are obliged to give permission to +modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our +views. +</p> +<p>But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial +for documentation for free software. When people exercise their right +to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are +conscientious they will change the manual too—so they can provide +accurate and usable documentation with the modified program. A manual +which forbids programmers from being conscientious and finishing the job, or +more precisely requires them to write a new manual from scratch if +they change the program, does not fill our community’s needs. +</p> +<p>While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some +kinds of limits on the method of modification pose no problem. For +example, requirements to preserve the original author’s copyright +notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK. It is +also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that +they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be +deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical +topics. (Some GNU manuals have them.) +</p> +<p>These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical +matter, they don’t stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the +manual to fit the modified program. In other words, they don’t block +the free software community from making full use of the manual. +</p> +<p>However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em> +content of the manual, and then distribute the result through all the usual +media, through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do +block the community, the manual is not free, and so we need another +manual. +</p> +<p>Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another +manual when a proprietary manual exists. The obstacle is that many +users think that a proprietary manual is good enough—so they +don’t see the need to write a free manual. They do not see that the +free operating system has a gap that needs filling. +</p> +<p>Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some +have not considered the issue. I hope this article will do something +to change that. +</p> +<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-manuals"></a> +<p>Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same +reason so many people consider proprietary software acceptable: they +judge in purely practical terms, not using freedom as a criterion. +These people are entitled to their opinions, but since those opinions +spring from values which do not include freedom, they are no guide for +those of us who do value freedom. +</p> +<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-promote-free-documentation"></a> +<p>Please spread the word about this issue. We continue to lose manuals +to proprietary publishing. If we spread the word that proprietary +manuals are not sufficient, perhaps the next person who wants to help +GNU by writing documentation will realize, before it is too late, that +he must above all make it free. +</p> +<p>We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted +manuals instead of proprietary ones. One way you can help this is to +check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, and +prefer copylefted manuals to noncopylefted ones. +</p> +<p><b>Note:</b> +We maintain a page that lists free books available from other publishers. +<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-3"></a> +<a name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-2"></a> +</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html> |