Francesco Poli wrote: > The Debian documentation policy[1] reads: > > | All manuals of the Debian Documentation Project (DDP) will be released > | under DFSG-compliant licenses > > On the other hand the APT HOWTO[2] is released under the GNU FDL. > Debian-legal consensus about the GFDL seems quite clear... > > Should a bug be filed, in your opinion? Definitely. > Among other things, the copyright notice[3] reads > > | Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 Gustavo Noronha Silva > | > | This manual is licensed under the terms of the GNU FDL (Free > | Documentation License). It has been written in the hope that it will > | be useful to the community but it comes with no warranty; use it at > | your own risk. > > As you can see, no explicit declaration about unmodifiable parts > (Invariant Sections, Front/Back-cover Texts, ...). > This looks like an incorrect application of the GFDL... > Is this undistributable? No, I don't think leaving it unspecified is an incorrect application, though it doesn't exactly follow the application guidelines in the GFDL itself. I would tend to say that any work under the GFDL which doesn't explicitly specify invariant sections or cover texts should be assumed to have none. This still doesn't make it DFSG-free, of course, so a bug should still be filed. Thank you for raising this issue. If the Debian project is going to advocate against the GFDL, we should certainly not have any works under that license ourselves. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature