Re: [rfa] License clarification for observer.texi

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 06:32:42AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 18:18:35 -0400
> > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> > 
> > Debian no longer permits the distribution of FDL'd works in the "main"
> > distribution.
> 
> Ah, it's _that_ issue.
> 
> > I am not permitted to include GFDL documentation in the main
> > tarball, but I must include observers.texi, in order to build GDB.
> 
> Why can't you simply include the generated observers.h in the main
> tarball?  It has the right license.

Because that would, in my opinion, violate at least the spirit of the
GPL.  "Preferred source for modification" is not that file, but the
manual.

> Anyway, I'm uneasy about making such a change because of the Debian's
> controversy.  When faced with issues like this (i.e. the same source
> that is used to produce both code and documentation), RMS always said
> that in practice this isn't a problem, since either the produced docs
> or the produced code is of insignificant amount.  So if distributing
> observers.h is somehow not an option, I think we should ask Richard
> for guidance.

I suppose I will have to do that, then.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery