Re: xemacs wiki

>>>>> "Hrvoje" == Hrvoje Niksic <[email protected]> writes:

    Hrvoje> Feel free to look at the sources as well.  A license
    Hrvoje> should (by design) be hard to miss.

XEmacs code is necessarily all GPL, and probably mostly FSF-assigned
(Ben has written an awful lot, but Lucid assigned all of Lucid Emacs,
and many XEmacs developers have signed papers; also anything synched
from GNU is FSF-assigned, of course).

The sources you need to look at are the XEmacs Texinfo sources, which
clearly state their own license.  It is similar to an anonymous
instance of the GFDL (therefore no "or later versions as published by
the FSF at your option" clause), with no cover texts and Invariant
Sections being the GNU GPL, the GNU Manifesto, and Distribution nodes.

Unfortunately, the GFDL also explicitly permits downstream editors to
add, but not subtract, cover texts and Invariant Sections, and
requires deletion of endorsements.  These hypothetical differences
actually make the XEmacs documentation license incompatible with the
GNU FDL, as both are strong copyleft requiring all of a derivative to
be distributed under identical terms.  Similarly both are incompatible
with the GNU GPL; "invariant sections" are not allowed by the GPL.
Seems logical, and that's what rms says.

GNU Emacs documentation is under the GNU FDL since version 20 or so.
Version 19 documentation is under the same terms as XEmacs
documentation still is.  GNU could hypothetically dual license it
under the FDL, but I don't think they ever did.  (They can't revoke
the old license for existing copies, of course.)

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.