Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > According to Simon Josefsson on 7/11/2006 2:49 AM: >> Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> In the m4 project, I wanted to update the documentation to include >>> the FDL in an appendix. gnulib contains doc/fdl.texi, but did not >>> have any easy way to import it over to m4. Would this patch be >>> acceptable to allow documentation to be pulled in as separate >>> modules? >> >> I tried to apply the patch, but it seems it was line-wrapped. Could >> you send it again? I think we should install it, I use fdl in most of >> my packages, and synching it from gnulib seems like a good thing. > > I went ahead and applied it, instead. Besides, Gary Vaughan submitted a > patch to m4 that wants doc/regexprops-generic.texi available as well as > fdl.texi, so it looks like documentation modules will be useful.
Great! > My only question is what license should I mark the fdl module as? For > now, I went with public domain - fdl.texi contains a disclaimer that it > can only be used without modification, but the text of the license is > certainly not GPL'd, and you can use the FDL on public domain projects. > Or maybe it is time to add another license category for documentation? How about 'self-describing' as the License: field? It is a bit problematic to have the modules file License: field be normative in some cases (for LGPL modules) and non-normative, or even incorrect, for other modules (if you put the GFDL as 'public domain'), but I don't have a good solution. /Simon
