On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 19:02 -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Mark writes: > > I have a personal project to write a guidebook for Project Management. > > I'd like to publish it under the GNU Free Documentation License. > > The GFDL in its present form is non-free and somewhat buggy. I suggest the > GPL (yes, you _can_ use it for documents). Failing that I suggest one of > the free Creative Commons licenses such as the attribution-only license.
This is a ridiculous statement. IF you use INVARIANTS, then it fails the Debian Free Software Guidelines. However, the DFSG is flawed when used against documents. Because of a flawed reasoning, the RFCs have been moved into non-free. Its infantile to treat GFDL as if it was a software license. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
