[Sussex] Distros

[Simon Huggins]

Hiya LUG,

On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 06:16:46PM +0100, Geoffrey J. Teale wrote:
> Paul Tansom <paul at aptanet.com> writes:>
> > That would seem to imply that the GFDL is not suitable for
> > documenting GPL source code, since you are unable to quote the
> > source code within the documentation in order to explain its
> > workings. This is more a license for documenting usage of
> > applications. (With the obvious proviso that if the original authors
> > are happy with the dual license you could use it).
> Not at all.  There are compatibility issues but dual licensing deals
> with direct quotes, which are the only issue.  GFDL was specifically
> designed for documentation relating to GPL code.  The idea that the
> GFDL is somehow fundamentally unsuitable for the task comes purely
> from the Debian project, the FSF routinely produces GFDL documentation
> for GPL code. 

Ah yes, Debian those evil, bad, nasty people distributing free software
yet not wanting to distribute GFDL'd docs.

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2004-12/msg00433.html

Is he a Debian developer too then?

-- 
 ,--huggie-at-earth-dot-li--------stuff-thing-stuff----------DF5CE2B4--.
_| If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. |_
 |                                                                     |
 `- http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ - http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ -'