Re: What's the plan for the user guide?

[karderio <karderio gmail com>]

On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 14:06 +0000, Joachim Noreiko wrote:
> --- Simos Xenitellis <simos74 gmx net> wrote:
> > Care to back this up? (URL?)
> 
> http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject_2fTasks
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html
> 
> Though surely this title business is a
> misinterpretation of the license? Otherwise it's plain
> nuts.

I would guess that it was a misinterpretation, as
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html
talks of "derivative documents". However the GFDL talks about changing
the title for "modified versions"... Therefore it would seem that the
title must be changed...

I would think that adding a version number at the end of the title would
not legally be considered changing the title, but rather keeping the
same title with an appended number. I think we may as well shed the
version number, as I don't think adding this exposes us any less to
legal threats.

That said, the current user-guide does not seem to respect a few other
things that the GDFL imposes :
* List authors on title page
* "State on the Title page the name of the publisher"
* Add a copyright notice for modifications
* The legal notice (GDFL license text or reference) does not seem to be
user visible (GNOME 2.12)

I would agree that the GFDL is just not meant for the task we are using
it for. 

Love, Karderio