Chris Karakas wrote: > GPL you say? Now if only someone could assure me that the statement > > "GPL is compatible with GFDL" > > holds true...sigh. I am afraid, if you take it up to the letter, they are > NOT. > > For a piece of code (say, a .lyx file containing the documentation) to be > under the GPL licence, it *must*: > > - Contain a Copyright Notice > - Contain a Disclaimer > - Come with source code > > etc... > > Now the LyX User's Guide does NOT contain the Disclaimer
This can be added. Use a comment environment or a note inset (depending on your version of LyX). > so the LyX User Guide is NOT under the GPL! > Furthermore, the GFDL has the notion of the "invariant chapters", which > cannot be altered, while with the GPL you can change almost everything. Clearly the GFDL is compatible with the GPL in the sense that you can include snippets of my GPLed code in your document. Thereafter your readers cannot alter the document (GFDLed) even though they could alter the source code. The same holds true here. Include your extract from the LyX document, tweak it to your heart's content (as allowed by the GPL) and licence it under the GFDL allowing no further modification. No? Maybe you should ask the FSF if this interpretation of their licences holds true. -- Angus
