Michael Olson пишет:
> 
> Following up, every single manual in Emacs' doc/misc directory is
> licensed under GFDL, with no dual-licensing.  It would be possible to
> maintain a separately-licensed copy *outside* of the Emacs tree, but
> we'd have to be very careful about not propagating changes verbatim from
> one copy to the other, and get permission from every current copyright
> holder, including myself.
> 
Also find example dual licencing in Debian Reference Guide.
 From Debian Reference Contributor's Guide
(debian-reference/manual.sgml):

> License

> All contributions must be licensed under
> both GPL and GFDL.
> I know about the controversy surrounding the GFDL.
> Please do not worry: I do not like GFDL either.
> The dual licensing requirement is just
> an extra safeguard that any part of this document may be combined
> with any other part or with GFDL documents.
> I consider even the GPL to be too restrictive and prefer the newer
> BSD license, but I wanted the DR
> to include bits from the Debian FAQ which is GPLed.
> If there were only nice people in the world then we would not
> need the GPL.
> GFDL documentation may still be useful if it is high quality
> document with partial freedom to everyone
> while making publishing house happy.

_______________________________________________
Dvc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev

Reply via email to