On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 06:36:03PM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > > >>http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/DocumentationDevelopment > > > >This webpage says "All files are under the GNU Free Documentation License > >version 1.2", but the documentation was under GPL'd (as discussed on the > >list months ago). When was this changed? > > I didn't know about the license of the docs. LyX is under the GPL but > one of the original authors of the docs licensed his contributions under > the artistic license: > > http://www.lyx.org/about/blanket-permission.php > > I used the GFDL because I thought the GFDL is the GPL variant for > documentations and that GPL is a subset of the artistic license in the > way of its restrictions. I reverted the statement of the wiki page and > linked the GPL instead. I hope this is OK now. > > But as I'm always confused about the license stuff, could anybody > explain the differences between GPL, GFDL and artistic license in short > words?
The GPL allows anything, except for changing the licence of course. It also guarantees that the code (or documentation) remains free. There is no problem releasing documentation under the GPL too. I have the impression that the GFDL was created in order to have a licence suitable for printing books. Real-world publishers doesn't want to spend money printing a book that people can legally photocopy. If you wonder what licence to use - read both and see what suits you best. They are only a few pages. Helge Hafting
