Re: GPL type license for documentation...

[Kylie Davies <beckster@warehouse.net>]

Steven Blunt wrote:
> 
> I've seen a lot of documentation that simply uses the GPL.  In particular I
> think the Gnome documentation is GPL.  The GNU documentation may be GPL
> also.

Stick with the way it has been done in the past...as so
far it has been successful. :)

> 
> The two licences seem compatable, so I don't think this will be a problem.
> I think we should try to avoid "for non-commercial use only" type
> documentation.

Yep, agreed.
> 
> Also the more I think about it, I think we should skip Pine in favour of a
> free (speech) mailreader.  

Something that would do both could be easier for ppl to
learn. 


>Elm is nice and Mutt seems good from what I've
> heard of it.  

Perhaps we ought to make some sort of document /database
that describes the types of software that we may be able
to use.


For Eg:

PINE: Support for IMAP? Has newsreader, not entirely free,
documentation - yes - rating - ?, easy to use - rating ?,
other info etc...also to possibly include the collection
of documentation resources that we can use and draw from.

Maybe there is something that we can already use?

kylie