[Savannah-hackers] [gnu.org #211627] Licensing LaTeX documents

[Dave Turner via RT]

> address@hidden - Sat Oct 02 13:10:48 2004]:
> 
> 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 
> 
> 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?

Sorry for the delay in responding.  I have been on vacation for the last
few weeks.

I don't know how to answer your question, because I don't know how the
various pieces of these systems fit together.  

Can you give me some code examples to look at?  Also, please describe
the flow of data among the various components of these systems.  

-- 
-Dave "Novalis" Turner
GPL Compliance Engineer
Free Software Foundation