Bug 330721 – Should FDL be included in the @FSF-APPROVED

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED INVALID

[Description Matija "hook" Šuklje 2010-08-01 15:37:50 UTC]

I noticed that the FDL licenses are not in the @FSF-APPROVED.

Since FDL is a FSF/GNU license and is *the* preferred (by FSF/GNU) license for documentation etc, I find it odd that it's not included in the list.

To quote from GNU's website:
--------------8<--
GNU Free Documentation License
The GNU FDL is recommended for textbooks and teaching materials for all topics. (“Documentation” simply means textbooks and other teaching materials for using equipment or software.) We also recommend the GNU FDL for dictionaries, encyclopedias, and any other works that provide information for practical use.
-->8--------------

[Comment 1 Ulrich Müller 2010-08-02 18:19:37 UTC]

Generally, we more or less follow the FSF's distinction between "software licenses" and "licenses for documentation". Therefore FDL* is a member of the @FSF-APPROVED-OTHER license group, which is part of @FREE-DOCUMENTS.

The structure below @FREE currently looks as follows:

   @FREE
   |
   +--@FREE-SOFTWARE
   |  |
   |  +--@FSF-APPROVED
   |  |  |
   |  |  +--@GPL-COMPATIBLE
   |  |
   |  +--@OSI-APPROVED
   |  |
   |  +--@MISC-FREE
   |
   +--@FREE-DOCUMENTS
      |
      +--@FSF-APPROVED-OTHER

I'd rather keep the branching between software and documentation at the first sublevel.

[Comment 2 Matija "hook" Šuklje 2010-08-02 18:42:15 UTC]

That makes great sense!

I just didn't know about other groups, since the manpage doesn't mention them.

Is there a list of them available? Preferably in official docs.

BTW, does the licenses team need fresh blood? ;)

[Comment 3 Ulrich Müller 2010-08-09 10:01:46 UTC]

Closing then.

(In reply to comment #2)
> BTW, does the licenses team need fresh blood? ;)

Gentoo in general does. ;)