From 6353bdab161bd74c216408b7f6c68136b1135007 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:21:50 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Provide some style editing for rationale chapter

Several FIXME remarks added where meanings were unclear; need mmcgrath or other primary author to advise further.
---
 en-US/Books/FreeSoftware/rationale.xml |   14 +++++++-------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/en-US/Books/FreeSoftware/rationale.xml b/en-US/Books/FreeSoftware/rationale.xml
index c90fcd8..4d48816 100644
--- a/en-US/Books/FreeSoftware/rationale.xml
+++ b/en-US/Books/FreeSoftware/rationale.xml
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 
     <title>Free Software Rationale</title>
     <para>
-      Free Software is more then just an application that is to be downloaded and used.  There's licensing considerations and legal obligations to consider.
+      Free Software is more than just an application to be downloaded and used.  There are also licensing issues and legal obligations to consider.
     </para>
     <warning><title>Draft</title><para>Please note that at present this document is of draft quality and subject to change!</para></warning>
     <section id="FreeSoftware-Rationale-Target">
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
             <primary>Free Software Rationale Target</primary>
         </indexterm>
         <para>
-            This rationale should be read by managers and legal teams who are considering the use of free software in &ORGANIZATION-NAME;.  Engineers and architects who are looking to adopt or install Free Software should read the standards chapter below.
+            This rationale should be read by managers and legal teams considering the use of free software in &ORGANIZATION-NAME;.  Engineers and architects looking to adopt or install Free Software should read the standards chapter below.
         </para>
     </section>
     <section id="FreeSoftware-Rationale-Details">
@@ -35,21 +35,21 @@
             <primary>Free Software Rationale Details</primary>
         </indexterm>
         <para>
-            When people talk about free software they are talking about more then just software that has no monetary cost.  Nor are not simply talking about Open Source.  In addition to the code and binaries that come with free software, certain rights are granted.  When someone in &ORGANIZATION-NAME; makes changes to free software, they may also be giving up certain rights.  This standard discusses various themes that come with free software.  It discusses what licenses are acceptable and which ones are not.
+            When people talk about free software they are talking about more than just software that has no monetary cost.  They are also talking about more than simply "Open Source," meaning available source code.  In addition to code and binaries that come with free software, it also grants certain rights.  Someone in &ORGANIZATION-NAME; who makes changes to free software may also be giving up certain rights.  This standard discusses details of the rights and responsibilities that come with free software, and sets out a framework for which licenses are acceptable.
         </para>
         <para>
-            The free software standard gives an explicit list of licenses deemed acceptable for Fedora's distribution.  It is important to remember that Fedora is the basis for all Red Hat compatible distributions.  As such the licensing choices made in Fedora affects the whole family. Because of this, CSI focuses on these licenses.  The current list of acceptable licenses can be found at: <ulink url="http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main">http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main</ulink>.  These license may be vetted by your legal team as well though, many of these licenses are already found in Red Hat based distributions it is likely they are already being used.
+            The free software standard gives an explicit list of licenses deemed acceptable for Fedora's distribution.  Fedora is the basis for all Red Hat compatible distributions, and therefore the licensing choices made in Fedora affect the whole family. Because of this relationship, CSI focuses on these licenses.  The current list of acceptable licenses can be found at <ulink url="http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main">http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main</ulink>.  These licenses may be vetted by your legal team as well, but since many of these licenses are already found in Red Hat based distributions, it is likely they are already being used. <remark role="FIXME">Used by whom?  I'm not sure what you mean here.</remark>
         </para>
         <para>
-            All of the licenses included in Fedora are considered Free as we use the term in this standard.  This freedom means that any individuals can use this software as is for any purpose including profit.  The trick comes when people want to alter materials covered by these licenses.  The standard instructs developers and other technical professionals how to remain legally compliant while also ensuring that they don't accidentally give away company secrets.
+            All of the licenses included in Fedora are considered "free," as that term is used in this standard.  This freedom means that any individuals can use this software as is for any purpose including profit.  When a recipient of the software wants to alter licensed materials, however, certain restrictions apply.  The standard instructs developers and other technical professionals how to remain legally compliant while also ensuring that they do not accidentally give away company trade secrets or other property.
         </para>
         <section id="FreeSoftware-Rational-Benefits">
             <title>Free Software Benefits</title>
             <para>
-                A major point worth mentioning about adopting this standard is that is causes your engineers, developers and architects to get involved with the larger open source and free software community.  The direct benefit of this is not having to maintain patches and source code changes internally.  Meaning, if your company finds a bug in a piece of software and fix it, they don't also have to fix future versions of the software.  While many view this as the "work benefiting the many" there is also a strong argument to be made for you doing work to benefit yourself.
+                A major point worth mentioning about the adoption of this standard is its effect on your employees or coworkers.  The free software standard causes your engineers, developers and architects to become involved with the larger free and open source software community.  The direct benefit of this involvement is not having to maintain patches and source code changes internally.  If your company finds a bug in a piece of software and fixes it, you are not required to fix future versions of the software.  <remark role="FIXME">I'm not sure if that last sentence is what you meant.</remark>  While you might view this as "work benefiting the many," there is also a strong argument to be made for doing work to benefit yourself.
             </para>
             <para>
-                The indirect benefits of getting your company involved in doing free software and being part of the larger community can be known as the larger expert pool.  In the closed source business model, cross company communication was rare.  For example, a bank and a large manufacturer both have needs for things like websites and email servers.  In the closed source model there was no real mechanism for them to get in touch with one another.  In the open source model they can.  By participating with the upstream projects, they meet others who are doing nearly identical work to what you are doing with your email server.  Thus, they can communicate, share in each other's mistakes and victories.  Being able to learn from the mistakes of others is a huge cost saver.  Especially if it means learning something won't work before you've purchased a million dollars in hardware.
+                The indirect benefits of getting your company involved in doing free software and being part of the larger community is the larger pool of expertise.  In the closed source business model, cross company communication is rare.  For example, a bank and a large manufacturer may both need supporting infrastructure like websites and email servers.  In the closed source model there is no real mechanism for them to contact one another regarding these needs.  In the open source model they can.  By participating with the upstream projects, they meet others doing nearly identical work on systems unrelated to any competitive or differentiating business function.  Thus, they can communicate and learn from each other's experiences.  Being able to learn from and avoid the mistakes of others produces huge cost savings in a business environment, such as learning something won't work <emphasis>before</emphasis> you've purchased a million dollars in hardare.
             </para>
         </section>
     </section>
-- 
1.6.0.6

