Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] News: Licenses clarification

[Walter Landry]

Sylvain Beucler <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > I am the project manager for ArX [1].  I read the news about licenses
> > clarification, and I have two comments/questions.
> > 
> >   1) My code has always been under GPL v2 only.  This was noted when I
> >      applied to savannah [2].  Is this going to be a problem?
> 
> Yes, if you die before GNU GPL v3 is released.

I don't understand what you mean here.  I am not the only copyright
holder.

> However this requirement applies to new projects only.
> 
> 
> >   2) My project includes a 56 page manual under GPL v2 only.  The only
> >      license I will use for documentation is the same as for the code.
> >      Since even RMS does not think that the GFDL is a free software
> >      license [3], that rules out the GFDL.
> 
> This is a borderline case since the source for the manual is not
> hosted at Savannah, but the manual is still available at
> www.nongnu.org.

The manual's source is available in the tarball available from Savannah.

> Is there a precise reason why the manual's license is bound to ArX's?

Because I want to be able to intermix code and documentation.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
address@hidden