Xfce documentation licenses

[edscott wilson garcia]

El vie, 21-01-2005 a las 08:06 +0100, Jasper Huijsmans escribió:
> Jacqueline McNally wrote:
> > Hello
> > 
> > I am creating documentation and training material for Computer Angels 
> > (www.computerangels.org.au) and Xfce features largely :)
> > 
> 
> Nice!
> 
> > What I need to know, is which license is applicable to the existing 
> > documentation:
> > http://www.loculus.nl/xfce/documentation/docs-4.2/
> > 
> 
> 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 would lean toward "public domain".

regards,

Edscott

> 
> 	Jasper
> 
> 
> > As suggested, I have looked at the different components, but many of the 
> > manuals and the guide refer to several licenses (BSD, LGPL and GPL). Are 
> > all these licenses applicable to the documentation?
> > 
> > I just thought that I would use similar licensing in the event that the 
> > documentation that I prepare may be of use to a wider audience.
> > 
> > Please can you advise which license is applicable to the Xfce 
> > documentation.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Jacqueline
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xfce4-dev mailing list
> > Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
> > http://lunar-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xfce4-dev mailing list
> Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
> http://lunar-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev

-- 
edscott wilson garcia <edscott at xfce.org>