[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GNU Free Documentation License v1.3

On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 17:53 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Hello.
> If the consensus is that GFDL 1.3 is as DFSG-compliant as it 1.2 was,
> then I would like to include it in common-licenses in base-files for lenny
> (in addition to 1.2, that is) as a "bonus".
> Reasons:
> * The symlink GFDL is supposed to point to the latest version available.
> * Works under GFDL-1.2 (not "1.2 or newer") should not refer to the
>   symlink but to the versioned license "GFDL-1.2".
> * It will make copyright-file compliance easier for packages in backports.
>   No need to update base-files in backports.org just to add a new license
>   as it happened in etch.
> So, if you have a strong reason why this should not be done, please speak now.

This is not a strong feeling, simply a comment:
I find it strange to add a licence that was created with a very specific
goal in mind (relicencing wikipedia) which will expire in 9 months
(August next year).


> Thanks.
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian user / gNewSense contributor
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: