[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Dual licensing of Org manual? |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Dec 2012 01:42:36 +0900 |
Bastien writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I changed the copyright notice of the Org manual to this:
>
> Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
> under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or
> any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no
> Invariant Sections and no Cover Texts.
Is this the correct wording? I parse that as "you may not add
Invariant Sections or Cover Texts", which conflicts with the FDL
itself. I would expect phrasing like "there are no Invariant Sections
or Cover Texts for this document."
- Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/13
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Glenn Morris, 2012/12/13
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/13
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/14
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/14
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Richard Stallman, 2012/12/14
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/15
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Richard Stallman, 2012/12/15
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/16
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bill Wohler, 2012/12/19
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Richard Stallman, 2012/12/19
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/20
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bill Wohler, 2012/12/20
- Re: Dual licensing of Org manual?, Bastien, 2012/12/20