(Repeating my message from a few days ago.)
Hi Sylvain and all,
(Switching to -public since I don't see that this stuff is secret.)
Can you tell me where we stand with all this? We were just getting
going when I had to be away ... rms wanted to get a status update.
Thanks,
k
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 23:40:15 -0500
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Sylvain Beucler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers-private] Documentation licenses
old-style GNU manual license / simple copyleft:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~100
We should ask them to upgrade. These old-style licenses
are incompatible with everything else.
missing / unclear:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We should ask them to put on clear notices about use of the GNU FDL.
ghostscript/ghostscript/doc/ghostscript.texi (GNU)
gv/gv/doc/gv.texi (GNU)
hyperbole/hyperbole/man/hyperbole.texi (GNU)
sather (GNU)
We should ask them to convert to the GFDL.
In the case of Ghostscript, we may have to replace the manual.
That may take time--it is not rush.
We need not bother the existing non-GNU packages with GPL'd manuals.
What we need to do is make sure there will not be any additional
ones in the future. This means, first of all, putting a clear statement
in the policies so that new projects will know that manuals must have
licenses compatible with "GFDL version N or later".
Karl, can you work on these three things with the Savannah people?
I expect it to take some time to do them all.
