Xfce documentation licenses

[Jeff Franks]

Jasper Huijsmans wrote:

> That's a very good question. We don't seem to really have a license on 
> them at the moment. Implicitly they have the same license as the 
> package they belong to, which basically means GPL.
>
> Personally, I don't mind at all how my part of the documentation is 
> used, as long as I'm not responsible for the results.
>
> Any other developer have an opinion? Should we add explicit licenses?
>
I've always assumed a license covers the entire package, including any 
documentation and examples, unless otherwise stated, which seems 
reasonable to me.

Jeff