[Savannah-hackers] Licensing LaTeX documents

[Sylvain Beucler]

Hello,

I would like to know what licensing terms you recommand for
documentation that uses external modules for the documentation system
(not the documentation itself), that are incompatible with the
licensing terms of the documentation.

For example, I am reviewing a project that offers LaTeX classes under
the GNU GPL, and uses the 'prosper' module, that is released under the
LPPL 1.2 and not present in my tetex distribution (Red Hat Linux
7.3's). Is it OK? Or does the project submitter needs to add a GPL
exception (maybe tacit) regarding LaTeX?

Another example, I write a document released under the GFDL based on
other GFDL work, using the Texinfo documentation system. Does this
mean I can only use GFDL'd Texinfo macros not present in the Texinfo
standard package?

What licensing terms would you recommend in such situations?

Thanks,

-- 
Sylvain
Savannah hacker: savannah.gnu.org