discuss: GFDL license
Subject:
Re: GFDL license
From:
Phil Kerr ####@####.####
Date:
24 May 2002 00:07:10 -0000
Message-Id: <3CED8427.B5EB05C7@plus24.com>
Thanks all for the feedback, I'll pass this on.
Although I'm pretty reassured that the GFDL is the right choice it does
show that there are perceptions of the politics surrounding licenses which
can put-off potential contributors which is something to be watched.
Cheers
Phil
David Lawyer wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:13:43PM -0500, David Merrill wrote:
> > For detailed analysis of licenses and so on, you would have to go to
> > other sources. The LDP will not specify which license you use, except
> > that it must make the document free to use, distribute, and modify for
> > commercial and noncommercial purposes, but allow charging for it.
> > Otherwise, it cannot be included in Linux distributions which is one
> > of our major methods of distribution.
>
> LDP requires that the document be free to copy and distribute. But we
> still allow restrictions on modification, but don't encourage it. Linux
> distributions will often include all LDP HOWTOs but Debian is going to
> put ones that can't be modified in their "non-free" section. I think
> the volunteers now active at LDP all strongly encourage a license which
> allows modification.
>
> David Lawyer
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
