Free documentation licenses

[John Cowan]

On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, SamBC wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Cowan" <cowan at locke.ccil.org>
> 
> 
> > IMHO it makes sense to release a manual under the same license
> > as the software, so that it can be changed in synchrony with the
> software.
> > What you have here looks like a close variant of new-BSD.
> > If you are releasing the software under new-BSD, then use new-BSD as
> > the documentation license as well.
> 
> 
> What if, however, as in my case, you are writing standalone
> documentation to software you did not produce,

The same applies.  If the software can be changed under given conditions,
it should be possible to change the documentation under the same conditions,
or the two cannot be kept mutually up-to-date.  A GPLed program should
have GPLed documentation; a BSDed program should have BSDed documentation,
IMHO.

> or detailing techniques,
> or even an academic treatise... the sLODL is suitable for all...

Those cases are out of my scope.

-- 
John Cowan                                   cowan at ccil.org
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
	--Douglas Hofstadter