[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intent of package LDP

On 30 Nov 1998, Ben Pfaff wrote:

> Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
>    I think it is not DFSG-compliant, because of this:
> 	* Any translation or derivative work of Linux Installation and
> 	  Getting Started must be approved by the author in writing before
> 	  distribution.
>    The funny thing is that later, it says "All source code in Linux
>    Installation and Getting Started is placed under the GNU General Public
>    License", which is incompatible with the fact that derivative works
>    must be approved by the author. The GPL does not require this.
> So example code is under the GPL.  This is different from the manuals
> themselves being under another license.  Unless I misunderstand the
> situation, this makes sense to me.

Ah, I understand. I was thinking about the manuals in source form
i.e. the .sgml file.

Ok, but then the manuals themselves are not DFSG-compliant, are they?

[ Point 3. "Derived Works" would fail, since you have to ask
  for permission ].

 "7f44d563e71763644c27c9de8dd19a83" (a truly random sig)

Reply to: