RE: CVS, templates, and changes to docs

["pat eyler" <p_eyler hotmail com>]

>From: Gregory Leblanc <GLeblanc@cu-portland.edu>
> > From: David C. Mason [mailto:dcm@redhat.com]
> > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 2:04 PM
> > Alexander Kirillov <kirillov@math.sunysb.edu> writes:
> >
> > > So here are some things which come to my mind:
> > >
> > > - licenses: FDL for docs, and software license section
> > > (GPL), and the trademark blurb as suggested by Dave - I > > believe, 
>this is mostly agreed
> >
> > Boy, I hope we all agree about this - we don't have a whole lot of
> > movement in this issue! But please let me know if you have problem
> > with it.
>
>Is there any freedom with this?  I won't stop writing if I have to use this 
>license, but I don't really like it all that much, the Open Publication 
>stuff from http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/ is more to MY liking.  As a 
>totally unrelated note, I believe that >some of the lawyers from Macmillan 
>publishing house have approved >this license for their books.
>

I'm not sure I my voice counts for much here as I've kind of
dropped off the horizon in terms of doing any writing on GDP
stuff.  I'm in the middle of signing a contract with New Horizons
to do a book on Networking, and part of the book will be released under the 
OPL.  I hope that the OPL won't be a stumbling block to
my contributing that portion of the book (covering ethereal,
EtherAPE, gxsnmp, et al.) to the GDB when I get it done.

-pate

>	Greg
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com