Re: Intent of package LDP
Santiago Vila <email@example.com> writes:
On 30 Nov 1998, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> 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 ].
That is the way that I see it.