Re: [Groff] actual standard of license

[MJ Ray]

On 2004-05-14 12:09:51 +0100 Bernd Warken 
<address@hidden> wrote:

> As the man pages of most GNU packages, such as emacs and cpp, still 
> use the 
> FDL I ask again whether we should really remove the FDL from the 
> groff 
> source?

Yes, you should. The present version of the FDL is not a free software 
licence. Some packages do not use the FDL, as I assume you have 
noticed because you wrote "most" above.

> I would prefer to go on with FDL for most documents, but would also 
> agree to 
> restrict to GPL as single license for all files.

There seems no good reason to go on with the FDL yet. The only obvious 
difference to using the GPL for the electronic documentation is the 
ability to include invariant sections and that sort of thing is 
normally not allowed in free software.

--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing