Frank Litchenheld wrote: > the reference manual license is stated as for the generated material > only and is by the maintainer himself. I would suggest to just declare > GPL instead like the source code (I don't know if re-licensing the > generated material under GFDL is even legal, but that's not the point > here anyway)
It's legal to *dual-license* it under the GFDL. However, if the source is under the GPL, then the auto-generated reference manual is under the GPL, too; that's the way it works. It would be really nice to ask the maintainer to make that explicit, however. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
