🚀 go-pugleaf

As the principal author of the GAWK manual I think I can shed some light on
the recent ``controversy'' about in-bad-taste comments appearing in the GAWK
manual.

>From the file gawk.ti, as distributed on the Usenet:
> 
> line 49:
> @center @titlefont{The GAWK Manual}
> @sp 4
> @center by
> @center Diane Barlow Close    <-- That's me!
> @center Arnold D. Robbins
> @center Paul H. Rubin
> @center Richard Stallman

I spent 6 months dealing with GAWK source code, programmer's notes, binaries
for testing, and notes from Brian Kernighan putting together the first GAWK
manual.  I am a paid, salaried Free Software Foundation technical writer (yup,
a real-live, official FSF *paid* technical writer).

>From the file gawk.ti, as distributed on the Usenet:
> line 241:
> Finally, we would like to thank Brian Kernighan of Bell Labs for invaluable
> assistance during the testing and debugging of @code{gawk}, and for
> help in clarifying several points about the language.@refill

That's *my* thank you and I wholeheartedly meant it (and still mean it!).  I
wrote that and it is in my original format (ie. nothing has been changed).

Now, if you remember your GNU manifesto lines, you know that ANYONE can make
changes to GNU source code (and that includes manuals) AS LONG AS THEY MAKE
THE CHANGES FREELY AVAILABLE.  That's what happened here.

When I finished with the manual I went on to work on the GNU operating system
utilities manual (as yet unreleased.  After that, and continuing now, went on
to write the BASH manual for the Boune Again SHell).  During some lag time
between official release of the GAWK manual, changes were made to the GAWK
program necessitating updating the GAWK manual.  I wasn't available to make
those changes and two volunteers were brought in -- David J. Mackenzie and
Arnold Robbins.  DJM made the changes to the GAWK program source and Mr.
Robbins updated the GAWK manual.

In doing the GAWK update, Mr. Robbins inserted several personal-opinion
comments (such as those being aired on the net).  Owing to a lack of time the
GAWK manual did not go through a final pass with an editor.  This is
unfortunate as the final manual reads like it was put together by several
people rather than flowing from one collective voice, and it contains several
inappropriate comments.  This is one of the few times that the FSF has bowed
to pressure from the outside to release something ``early''.  I wasn't even
informed of the changes to the GAWK text and its release until *after* it had
become fact.  That's too bad.  I spotted the ``faux pas'' immediately and
figured they cause a ruckus sooner or later.

I can only hope that this incident encourages better editing and communication
within the FSF.

>From the file gawk.ti, as distributed on the Usenet:
> line 222:
> @comment We don't refer people to non-free information
> @comment  In 1988, the original authors
> @comment published @cite{The AWK Programming Language} (Addison-Wesley, ISBN
> @comment 0-201-07981-X), as a definitive description of the @code{awk} 
> language.

> line 1132:
> @c We don't refer to hoarded information.
> @c  (See
> @c @cite{The UNIX Programming Environment} by Brian Kernighan and Rob Pike,
> @c Prentice-Hall, 1984, for more information on writing shell programs that
> @c use the Unix utilities.  The most powerful version of the shell is the
> @c Korn shell.  A detailed description of the Korn shell can be found in
> @c @cite{The KornShell Command and Programming Language} by Morris Bolsky
> @c and David Korn, Prentice-Hall, 1989.)

These two comments were inserted into the GAWK text by Arnold Robbins long
*after* I wrote my thank-you to Brian Kernighan et. al.  *That's* why this
section doesn't seem to fit -- it was written by someone else.

J. Greely writes:
> harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) writes:
>>I personally feel very bad on the Kernighan's behalf.  After putting
>>so much work into his books (every one, IMO, a classic) and setting
>>a new standard for excellence in programming books, and then graciously
>>helping the gawk authors to copy his work, and then being called an
>>INFORMATION HOARDER!!!!
>
>But not by the authors!  Everyone's griping about editorial commentary
>that doesn't appear in the formatted manual, and probably should have
>been removed before distribution (bets on whether or not it shows up
>in the next update?).  The editor presumably felt that citing material
>that was not freely available contradicted the frequently-repeated
>political goals of the FSF.

Exactly!  It should have been removed before distribution, but remember too --
anyone can change the GAWK manual to say *anything* as long as they make it
freely distributable.  I could insert ``George Bush wears women's underwear''
as a comment any time I please.  :-)  That doesn't make it right...
--
Diane Barlow Close
	close@lunch.wpd.sgi.com
	also 	close@cygnus.com
	I'm at lunch today.  :-)