discuss: LDP "non-free" documents
Subject:
Re: LDP "non-free" documents
From:
Jorge Godoy ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2005 19:54:39 -0000
Message-Id: <87fyz3nuo8.fsf@jupiter.g2ctech>
Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.#### writes:
> I am the current maintainer for the LDP Author Guide. I'm working on the
> section on licensing right now. It has been brought to my attention that
> the LDP documents have been divided into "free" and "non-free" packages. I
Which people have divided it, besides the ones packaging it for Debian? I've
only heard of them doing that.
> would like to give our authors a succinct explanation on the distinction so
> that they may choose the best license for their document.
I this is a very good thing, but shouldn't be tied to any distributions
policy. You see, Red Hat, SuSE, Conectiva, Turbo Linux, Mandrake,
etc. doesn't make this distinction. It is better to have a policy of our own
and let each distribution decide on their packaging.
But, it is very important to make the licensing aspects clear to our authors.
If citing the *Debian policy* helps, I think it is worth, but if their policy
is the only reason then we are starting with the wrong motivation -- even if
the work is valid.
Anyway, this is just my opinion.
--
Godoy. ####@####.####
