Xfce documentation licenses

[Brian J. Tarricone]

James Tappin wrote:

> IIRC the GNU FDL is considered incompatible with the Debian Free Software
>
>Guidelines, which causes problems for having the affected packages in the
>main distribution.
>See http://www.uk.debian.org/News/weekly/2004/38/
>  
>
i will be nice; i will not insult debian.
i will be nice; i will not insult debian.
gah!  debian pisses me off.
never mind.

actually, if you read along, it says that if you add a lines to:

> 1) Allow storage/transmission on encrypted filesystems/links to
>    counter the "DRM restriction"?
> 2) Not require forcing distribution of transparent copies with bulk
>    opaque copies?

then it "tentatively" is DFSG-free.  but, amusingly, still GPL-incompatible.

i like their idea to do this instead:

  This document is licensed under the GNU General Public License version
  2 as published by the Free Software Foundation. References to "object
  code" and "executables" in the GNU GPL are to be interpreted as the
  output of any document formatting or typesetting system, including
  intermediate and printed output.

perhaps we should do that?  or maybe something simpler, like a creative 
commons attribution-sharealike license?

or maybe we should just leave it the way it is and not care.

    -b