En réponse à Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > We should have criteria for documentation licenses on Savannah > > just as we have criteria for software licenses. > > I think we should call for documentation licenses to be > compatible > > with the GFDL or the GPL. > > Am I correct if I say the GNU hasn't got a list like that yet? > > I don't entirely understand what list you mean. There are infinitely > many possible licenses that are compatible with the GFDL, and > infinitely many that are compatible with the GPL. So there cannot be > a complete list of acceptable licenses, as I see it. > > In practice, only a finite set of such licenses have actually been > used. > Practically speaking, we can have a fixed list of the normally > acceptable > licenses. It needs to be constructed. > > Is there a fixed list of licenses allowed for savannah.nongnu.org? > I don't know the precise criteria.
There is no fixed list. There is a criteria: the compatibility with the GPL. To help users, we propose a list of well known GPL-compatible licenses to them. They know, by picking these licenses, that their software is GPL-compatible. But they can come up with another license, which one we would review before accepting the project, to make sure it's truly GPL-compatible. Eventually we ask for an advice to [EMAIL PROTECTED] when a proposed license is too confusing. -- Mathieu Roy -- I\'m right now on vacation and I\'m forced to use an unfriendly tool to get/send mail. If you expect a reply from me very soon, add \"urgent\" in the subject field -- _______________________________________________ Savannah-hackers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/savannah-hackers