[Fedora-legal-list] Does License tag include manuals?

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

>>>>> "BW" == Bruno Wolff <bruno at wolff.to> writes:

BW> lordsawar has a gfdl manual that is installed. Does that need to be
BW> reflected in the license tag such that it should be GPLv2+ and
BW> GFDL1.1+, instead of just GPLv2+?

The license tag covers whatever is in the binary (sub)package.
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License:_field

According to:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios

"
If your package contains files which are under multiple, distinct, and
independent licenses, then the spec must reflect this by using "and" as
a separator.
"

I don't see anything in there that specifically excludes documentation,
and we have had plenty of problems with licensing of documentation in
the past, forcing documentation to be excluded from packages.  The
licensing page also includes mention of documentation licensing and
gives short names for them (for use in License: tags).
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Documentation_Licenses

If you want to keep the licensing pure within a particular package, you
can push the documentation out to a subpackage which can carry its own
license tag.  This is not required, however.

 - J<