Google Code Hosting
Alfred M. Szmidt
ams at gnu.org
Fri Oct 27 22:48:18 UTC 2006
> FWIW, it's clearly different: the GPL can be used for manuals,
> but is not an FDL-compatible licence, because it does not
> allow addition of unremovable adverts and the other FDL
> These are not problems, again you spread more FUD.
No, YOU are spreading confusion, and YOU should stop doing that.
Where is the confusion?
Whether you like or not, there are people that do not like the
GFDL, and there are documents released under the GPL and the
license might not be changeable.
Yes, and this has nothing to do with the GFDL. Warning users about
some "implication" of a free documentation license is like warning
users about the implications of a free software license, both are
absurd; and this is why it is FUD.
This is a _real_ problem if you want to move to savannah or gna
because their policy and your legal situation may simply conflict.
This is a problem for any work which is copyrighted. I fail to see
Opinion: I don't like being forced to change the license of my
documentation from GPL to GFDL
Nobody is holding a gun to your head.
Both these opinions are based on facts, please, either confute
facts or stop with this propaganda for the GFDL, we know what the
GFDL is, if it is good or not for our projects, if we like it or
not, or if we want to use it or not.
They are not based on facts; if they were, they would not be opinions.
The FUD that is being spread is that there is some horrific
implication of hosting things on Savannah, and if you host it there
you sell your soul to the Devil. One might just as well start
discussing the implication of giving users freedom, and warn everyone
about using free software since in many cases the work cannot be
licensed under a free software license since the copyright holders
missing or whatever.
More information about the Discussion