Follow-up Comment #5, bug #29585 (project avrdude):
Regarding the license, your current text is what used to be recommended for
GNU manuals. Personally, I wish the FDL had somehow been made compatible with
it, but it isn't. One big issue that comes up immediately is that the old
"Permission is granted..." style says nothing about opaque and transparent
copies, so as far as I know it would be legally possible to distribute printed
copies, for example, without the readers being able to get the source.
As for "a lot more restrictions": no. (More complicated, yes, clearly so.)
If you do not use Front-Cover Texts, Back-Cover Texts, or Invariant Sections,
the only significant new requirements are on people publishing lots of printed
copies.
After all, your original text and the FDL were written by the same person
(rms) with the same purpose (to make documentation free). He would be the
last person in the world who would want to impose problematic restrictions.
Best,
karl
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?29585>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.nongnu.org/
_______________________________________________
avrdude-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avrdude-dev
