<posted & mailed> Matthieu Delahaye wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm currently working on a correct debianisation of uC++ [1] with their > author. They already provide debian packages but they are not 100% > respecting Debian policies. > > The author wrote a consistent manual for this software [2]. Currently the > "license" is not usable to be uploaded under Debian. It says: > > "Permission is granted to make copies for personal or educational use" > > They are ok to change the license of this document so that it can > be DFSG free. > > Now the question is which one they should use. He should use the same license as he uses for the program itself. This has a ridiculous number of advantages over any other choice. > The problem of a > documentation license is not new and there is still some discussion > about the freeness of some of them. > > My aim here is not to start a discussion about should these previous > license be free or not free. I just want to know if there is a list of > common license for documentation that are definitively known to be DFSG > free. > > Thanks in advance, > > Matthieu Delahaye > > [1] : http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~usystem/uC++.html > [2] : ftp://plg.uwaterloo.ca/pub/uSystem/u++-5.0.ps.gz -- There are none so blind as those who will not see.
