Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-doc (4 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-doc] Opensuse KDE Documentation
  • From: Burkhard Lück <lueck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 22:14:53 +0200
  • Message-id: <201003282214.53804.lueck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Am Sonntag, 14. März 2010 21:20:16 schrieb Burkhard Lück:
Am Freitag, 12. März 2010 16:44:34 schrieb Juergen Weigert:
Hi Burkhard!

On Mar 10, 10 15:44:40 +0100, Burkhard Lück wrote:
Hallo Doku-Wichtl,

Wow, a surprisingly correct and welcomed salutation. :-)

I am working since some years in the german translation team and in the
kde documentation team.

A few days ago I accidently found this page with a KDE User Guide
and a KDE Quickstart Manual for KDE 4.

Good you found us! Though 'accidently' makes me worry a bit. :-)

Accidently because I am no Suse user (even if a suse from around 6.0 opened
my eyes for the wonderfull world of free software and convinced me to
switch to Linux, thanks a lot SuSE!); debian/kubuntu here; and because I
never expected a distri to write something like a KDE User Guide - that
should be the responsibility of the kde documentation team.

I am writing here for several reasons:

* using modified parts of these documentation in KDE.
The documentation is Copyright 200-2009 Novell Inc. and FDL licensed?

Yes, please do so. We publish under GFDLv2.1 - with a section containing
the text of GFDL2.1, marked as invariant section.

2.1 must be a typo, you mean 1.2?
With your use of the invariant section I am really confused (but IANAL),
As far as I understand the FDL your invariant section seems to be
superfluous: If i want to use a FDL licensed text with no invariant
section I have to add a copyright for the source text anyway and license
the modified text under FDL, so why is your invariant section needed?

Is this an issue for the kind of modification you are planning? says about Documentation:
FDL versions 1.2 or later versions with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Text.

"with no Invariant Sections" might be the problem here, that's why I mailed
to kde-licensing@xxxxxxx and asked for clarification.

I got this answer by Alex Merry on kde-licensing@xxxxxxx:
Erm... how on earth did that get into their copyright statement? The FDL
actively prohibits anything other than a "Secondary Section" being
designated Invariant, and a Secondary Section "is a named appendix or a
front-matter section of the document that deals exclusively with the
relationship of the publishers or authors of the Document to the
Document's overall subject..."

Now, I guess that you could read "front-matter" to include copyright
notices, but that is clearly not what is intended. Especially as in
section 4 it says: "...provided that you release the Modified Version
under precisely this License..." and "you must... Preserve all the
copyright notices of the Document".


Well, I'm not even sure Novell's licensing header is valid, since they have
designated as an Invariant Section something that (by my reading) is
prohibited by the FDL from being an Invariant Section.

His argument wrt "Secondary Section" seems to be valid to me, what do you

Burkhard Lück
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-doc+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-doc+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
List Navigation