Free documentation licenses

[David Johnson]

On Monday 27 November 2000 05:13 am, John Cowan wrote:

> 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.

The software in question is under the GPL. I have thought seriously about 
releasing the documentation under the GPL as well. But a software license 
just doesn't fit well for documentation. I am also contacting the developer I 
am writing for to get his opinions, but he'll probably leave it all up to me. 
After all, he's overjoyed that someone stepped up to write it in the first 
place :-)

I am heavily leaning towards the GFDL, but it still seems overkill for this 
document (it's a small to medium application handbook). If all else fails 
I'll probably wind up using the GFDL to at least add synchonicity with the 
application.

<In a later missive>

> 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 very good point. But the document's license doesn't have to be the same as 
the application's for the benefit. It can also use a less restrictive license 
and achieve the same goal. 

-- 
David Johnson
___________________
http://www.usermode.org