Re: License questions for Emacs doc files

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>]

> i) doc/emacs/gnu.texi is the GNU Manifesto, which is an invariant
> section of the Emacs manual. Yet at the start of gnu.texi, there is a
> standard GFDL license notice, which says there are no invariant
> sections! This is weird, isn't it? Shouldn't gnu.texi just say "see
> file emacs.texi for copying conditions", or perhaps have a verbatim
> license like etc/GNU?

Look odd, indeed.  Could someone figure out what's the right thing to
do here.

> ii) doc/emac/misc/mh-e.texi is dual licensed under GPLv3+ and GFDL 1.2
> (with no invariants and no cover text). Is that OK?

That's perfectly fine by me.

> iii) Should all the doc/emac/misc/*.texi files be standardized in
> terms of their Invariant and Cover text sections? Most of them have no
> Invariant, front cover "a GNU Manual", and back cover "You have the
> freedom to copy and modify...". Some of them are missing the cover
> texts - should these be added?

Some consistency would be good, yes.  But if the manual (and the
corresponding package) is also distributed separately, they may prefer
a slightly different arrangement and it's good to stick to it in
that case.


        Stefan