Re: [Groff] Unix Text Processing - PDF Bookmarks

> *Very* nice. Great work! > A further patch is required to pdfmark.tmac changing it to use the > \! to communicate with grops instead of \X. [...] As soon as you have something to commit, please drop me a note. Werner

[Groff] GPL or FDL

The groff source tree is usually licensed to GPL. That is excellent. But there are also some documents under the GNU FDL. This is regarded as bad by Debian. Many years ago, Debian made the groff package as non-free because of the FDL. So I changed many documentation files in the groff tree to

Re: [Groff] GPL or FDL

> So which license should we prefer for documentation files: > - make all documentation files into GPL > - make all documentation files into FDL > - keep the licenses of all files as they are Since I currently don't want to invest much time into groff, I vote for no change, of course. > In any c

Re: [Groff] GPL or FDL

> Von: "Werner LEMBERG" > > > So which license should we prefer for documentation files: > > - make all documentation files into GPL > > - make all documentation files into FDL > > - keep the licenses of all files as they are > > Since I currently don't want to invest much time into groff, I vote

Re: [Groff] GPL or FDL

This mail goes to the Debian admins. I think that's mostly Colin Watson. > Von: "Bernd Warken" > > The groff source tree is usually licensed to GPL. That is excellent. > > But there are also some documents under the GNU FDL. This is regarded > as bad by Debian. Many years ago, Debian made the

Re: [Groff] GPL or FDL

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:54:43PM +0100, Bernd Warken wrote: > This mail goes to the Debian admins. I think that's mostly > Colin Watson. Exclusively me; I have no co-maintainers of the groff package at present. That said, the General Resolution regarding the GFDL was a decision of the whole pro