Apple's Common Documentation License

[Marc Rauw]

David Johnson wrote:
> The OSI does not approve documentation licenses, only software
> licenses. But I would use the CDL anyway. It fully follows the
> spirit of Open Source, and as you remarked, it is approved by the FSF.

Thanks for your feedback. Having read a number of 'open documentation'
licenses, I choose the CDL, because it seemed much more practical than e.g.
the GNU Free Documentation License. On the other hand, I remembered the
controversy over the 'other' Apple license, so I thought a small check over
here would be useful (which doesn't mean I don't trust the FSF... :).

Marc Rauw.

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3