Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 09:17:24PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 19 lines which said: > I think -legal came to a very definite consensus that licensing the > documentation under the exact same license as the program was always > the right thing to do. I agree.

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 10:34:46AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > It saves *so* much trouble. > > But not all documentation is attached to a software. For instance, if > I write a book "Software development on Debian", releasing it under > the GFDL is still the reasonable thing to do. Not

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 12:08:23PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 15 lines which said: > > I write a book "Software development on Debian", releasing it under > > the GFDL is still the reasonable thing to do. > > Not if you want it to be part of Debian. It still

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread MJ Ray
Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But not all documentation is attached to a software. For instance, if > I write a book "Software development on Debian", releasing it under > the GFDL is still the reasonable thing to do. It's reasonable if you want to attach adverts to it and allow others

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Alexander (Sasha) Wait
On 1/5/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > But not all documentation is attached to a software. For instance, if > > I write a book "Software development on Debian", releasing it under > > the GFDL is still the reasonable thing to do. > > It's reasona

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Michael Banck
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 06:15:18PM -0500, Alexander (Sasha) Wait wrote: > It's really sad to see blood boil over these licenses. Since I am > talking to people at FSF & CC regularly, I would be more than happy to > bring Debian concerns to both groups in a, hopefuly, productive > fashion.If th

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Anthony Towns
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 09:37:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > > [3] http://wiki.debian.org/GFDLPositionStatement > That page says it is immutable. You need to log in. Cheers, aj -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-05 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 03:02:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > It's based on Manoj's draft position statement [2] with some notable > changes (an explicit "why not just say docs != software" section, a > "how can this be fixed" section, a "what is the GFDL?" section, and > reordering the major pr