Re: old and new GNU documentation licenses, and the some of the manuals to which they apply

[Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl>]

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:11:16AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 07:16:51PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > * GAWK: The GNU Awk User's Guide; Edition 2, "for the 3.0.3 (or later)
> >   version of the GNU implementation of AWK."
> > 
> >   This manual's new license is:
> > 
> >      Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
> >   under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
> >   any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with the
> >   Invariant Sections being "GNU General Public License", the Front-Cover
>                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> People who like to bitch about the GPL being non-free take note: *this*
> time it really is. Contemplate the differences.

I also find it hard to bend my mind in such a way that a copy of the
GPL is a section that "deals exclusively with the relationship of the
publishers or authors of the Document to the Document's overall
subject (or to related matters)".  How is this a Secondary Section?

(Here's a test: after gawk moves to GPLv3, is it important to keep
a copy of the GPLv2 in the documentation?  Would you add the GPLv3
as an Invariant Section?  If so, why?)

Richard Braakman