[scribus] 1.4.2 and Fedora 18
tornoci.laszlo at med.semmelweis-univ.hu
Sat Feb 23 13:53:28 UTC 2013
On 02/23/2013 11:15 AM, "Christoph Schäfer" wrote:
> I'm becoming a bit tired of these never-ending and sneaky attempts to
> blackmail us into a change of the documentation licence just because
> you or one of your buddies don't like it.
I was not happy to read this thread. I appreciate the work of both
Christoph (I've bought a copy of "The official manual"), and a.l.e who
contributed a _lot_ to this list and helped to answer hundreds of
questions here. Scribus is well known, but not large enough. The use of
this style hurts the whole project imho.
I think we need a more pragmatic view about the docs licence. Every
decision you make in your life has benefits and drawbacks associated
with it. No decision is "right" per se. While I completely understand
the reason why that particular licence was chosen for the docs, I still
have to say it was unusual, and considering all effects not a good
choice. It solves one problem, but it creates some others. This is not
the first time distributions drop the docs of scribus because of the
licence. And scribus is not very easy to learn, let's face that. So the
licence hinders the acceptance of scribus. You may argue that this
shouldn't have happened, and the people who compile the distros
misinterpret the licence, and that they are simply not right. But that
I am not sure though that the licence should be changed, I don't even
know if that is feasible or not. And definitely it is not up to me to
make this decision. But the problem is there, so something should be
done about it. E.g. providing less complete docs with a licence that is
"free enough" for the major distros, as a.l.e suggested. Ok, I know, I
am free to start working on this (but unfortunately, I don't have the
time to do that).
So gentlemen, please, less blood, more pragmatism. I like scribus, and
I'd like to see it more successful. Just my 2c.
More information about the scribus