Follow-up Comment #5, task #8909 (project administration): The licensing of the doc files is a bit ambivalent. A verbatim license file of GPLv2 is in that directory but no notice on the top of the actual files. This could be (mis)interpreted that the GPL is in there only for reference but does not apply to the docs.
Omitting a copyright and license notice is OK for trivial files, but we can expect the manual to grow over time. Therefore, it is recommended to give them an explicit license notice right away. If the GPL "header" is too big/sophisticated for some file, this might be a good alternative: http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#License-Notices-for-Other-Files _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?8909> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
