On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 11:57:45AM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > Incompatibility of licenses does cause real obstacles to certain uses, > and it might be worth changing the GFDL to solve that problem, if it > can be done without big drawbacks. I'm going to think about this > question. But the same issue arises for free documentation licenses > that don't have invariant sections, and Debian is not considering > rejecting them. It's not valid to use this argument against the GFDL > alone. I don't believe anyone here is making the argument that the GPL incompatibility is grounds for rejecting the GFDL as being non-free; but certainly GPL-compatibility is something many of us /desire/ for our documentation licenses, and I think the hope is that you would share this desire -- particularly since a documentation license that's compatible with GPLv2 would necessarily also be DFSG-free. As it stands, there are several terms in the GFDL which appear to each render the license non-free from Debian's POV, regardless of GPL compatibility. Regards, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpEtfENoTiPO.pgp
Description: PGP signature