Re: Gnus Manual License
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:58:08 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> said:
>> My point, though, is that I believe that the differences between the
>> restrictions in the OpenSSL license and the GFDL license are
>> sufficient such that one cannot say that "If OpenSSL is allowed, the
>> GFDL documentation should be allowed as well."
> Straw man: "the GFDL documentation should be allowed as well" was not
> the point of discussion. It rather was "GFDL documentation with the
> minimum front and back cover texts prescribed by the current GNU
> maintainer guidelines and no other explicitly invariant material
> should be allowed as well".
Fine:
My point, though, is that I believe that the differences between the
restrictions in the OpenSSL license and the GFDL license are
sufficient such that one cannot say that "If OpenSSL is allowed, then
GFDL documentation with the minimum front and back cover texts
prescribed by the current GNU maintainer guidelines and no other
explicitly invariant material documentation should be allowed as
well."
Reply to: