On Sun, 2003-08-24 at 09:10, Jérôme Marant wrote: > One thing we are sure about, is that, according to RMS, FSF is aware > of the GPL compatibility problem and is going to work this out, as soon > as it gets enough manpower. The only "manpower" required should be a clause that allows converting the document to be under the GPL, much like the clause used in the LGPL. This would result in the most possible restrictions while still being GPL compatible. Any other GPL compatible license, must be "freer" than the GPL. It would be nice to hear a representative of the FSF speak up about this issue -- is this change to the GFDL happening? Does it actually address Debian's concerns, or are invariant sections and transparent formats going to remain? -- Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part