Re: [Caml-list] OCaml reference manual non-free license

[Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com>]

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 07:13:14PM +0100, Allan Wegan wrote:
> > The only way a reference manual can be admissible as a (citable)
> > publication is if, once released, it is not editable.
> > But, indeed, if it is not editable, it is not free anymore... Here is
> > where we are stuck and have been for a long time with no escape (so
> > far).
> 
> Not working in science myself - but is it forbidden to cite a specific
> version of a manual as published by one specific source?
> 
> Just mentioning the repository where one got the manual from and the
> commit ID or version ID given by the author should provide enough data
> for everyone to be able to verify the cited source.

Have a look at how the Wikipedia says to cite their pages.  Then go do 
something similar. 

If you want, you can make available an official version (updated rarely, 
and possibly made avaailable in print form for those that want it so)
and a development version, which changes continuously.  Now and then 
produce a new edition, so that a citation can refer to page 75-79, 
second edition.

-- hendrik

> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Allan Wegan
> <http://www.allanwegan.de/>
> Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
>  OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
> Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
>  OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
>