Re: Intent of package LDP
--On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 11:59 am -0500 "Ben Pfaff" <pfaffben@pilot.msu.edu>
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.
Certainly the situation makes sense.
Whether or not documentation has to be covered by the DFSG is a moot point,
subject to clarification by a new version of the DFSG at some stage...
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| Debian GNU/Linux - "Microsoft *does* have a year 2000 problem - |
| and we're it!" (paraphrased from IRC) |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: