[python-advocacy] Advocacy Materials License and Web Frameworks Whitepaper

[sdeibel]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Jeff Rush wrote:
> Paul, it definitely is a desirable thing and while I follow software licenses, 
> apparently I'm not current on the various licensing issues for documentation.
> 
> Researching a bit, I see some good explanation of the various documentation 
> licenses at:
> 
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#TOC2FreeDocumentationLicenses
> 
> I've changed the text on wiki.python.org to link to this page, and also 
> recommend the GNU Free Documentation License.  If anyone has strong opinions 
> on such licenses, please speak up.

Some more info on this.  I asked whether any of the PSF directors 
care about the license and Andrew Kuchling pointed me to:

http://people.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml

It claims the GFDL "it is fundamentally incompatible with any 
free software license whatsoever" because its restrictions make 
it impossible to "borrow text from a GFDL's manual and 
incorporate it in any free software program whatsoever."

The key issues are overly broad language that ends up prohibiting 
common things like encrypting docs in your own disk, distributing 
something like a postscript or PDF file, or making excerpts when 
parts of a document are declared to be "invariant" by the author.

Apparently the DFSG FAQ recommends using the same license as the 
software for its documentation, which might argue for PSFv2.

- Stephan