Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 15:16 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing does not mention GPL etc as
permissible for documentation though I pretty sure we do ship GPL'ed
documentation. Perhaps a generic note should be added that what is
permissible for code is permissible for content (though may or may not
be suitable).
It's not generally true. The GPL, while used for some documentation, is
a terrible choice. Other licenses are worse, because they explicitly
make references to code. I've purposely not listed the GPL here, because
neither Fedora nor the FSF wants to encourage its usage as a
documentation license.
Right. So why not list GPL specifically as permissible but not recommended?
A related blog post
http://www.dhanapalan.com/blog/2008/02/16/a-licence-odyssey/
Rahul
_______________________________________________
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
