> I believe that the right fix (short of simply abandoning the GFDL, > which would be fine with me, but is presumably not going to pass > muster with RMS) is a revision to the GPL that explicitly permits > relicensing GPL'd content under the GFDL, by anyone. Movement in > that direction should not be of concern to the FSF; the point of the > GFDL was to prevent people removing the FSF's philosophical > statements in its manuals, not to prevent GPL'd content from being > used in manuals.
I like the sound of this proposed solution and agree fully with your intent to get back to a more workable state for documentation production and creation. The simple plan as outlined above is frankly much easier to explain and understand than these autogen GPL-index + GFDL content machinations. That is unworkable IMHO. Please, members of the SC, make this case. -benjamin