Is Bazaar's document distributed under GPL?

[Wichmann, Mats D]

Martin Pool wrote:
> 2009/9/21 INADA Naoki <songofacandy at gmail.com>:
>> Hi all.
>> 
>> lp:~bzr-ja team has started Document translation project
>> lp:bzr-doc-ja. 
>> 
>> Now we discussing about Document License.
>> Some restriction in GPL is too heavy for Documents and it is why GNU
>> presents GFDL. 
>> 
>> Must we treat Bazaar's document under GPL?
>> Or can we treat it under other license like GFDL?
> 
> At the moment it is under the GPL, like the code.  I'm open to
> changing it to GFDL or something else, or possibly dual-licensing.
> I'll refer it to our licence expert, in parallel with this thread.

As the gatekeeper of a document under the GDFL, I can say we
hear complaints about that choice too.  It seems there's no way
to keep everybody happy ...  there's a Debian position statement
on this, for example; at least in that case it's been made
clear what they think is okay and what they don't.