On 2024-10-29 23:42, Krzysztof Siewicz via RT wrote:
On Sun Oct 27 02:57:57 2024, jing@jing.rocks wrote:> Please let me know if I'm missing something. I would definitely want to > know more why you need compatibility between license for documentation > and license for code. I think (but maybe I'm mistaken) that this would > matter if code and documentation were intended to be combined into a > single work. For joint distribution of code alongside documentation > license compatibility is not necessary. I'm open for counter-arguments, > though. A notable example of "code and documentation were intended to be combined into a single work" is manpages. E.g. debian policy requires that every executable must come with a manpage (hence trisquel does too), otherwise such package will be rejected by debian.Please excuse my ignorance, but what is this combination in case of manpages? Is it formatting text in nroff format?
Ah yes, but I was talking about packages using help2man to generate a manpage [1].
[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/help2man/In any case, my point is that if we don't insist FDL compat for docs, we can save a lot of trouble without making a moral compromise.
-- Jing Luo About me: https://jing.rocks/about/ GPG Fingerprint: 4E09 8D19 00AA 3F72 1899 2614 09B3 316E 13A1 1EFC
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
