From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13015 invoked by alias); 9 May 2006 12:59:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 13007 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2006 12:59:26 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 May 2006 12:59:24 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FdRoB-0000kc-14 for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 09 May 2006 08:59:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:59:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfa] License clarification for observer.texi Message-ID: <20060509125922.GA2808@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060508210440.GA18323@nevyn.them.org> <20060508221835.GA20262@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00164.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 06:32:42AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > 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. Hi Eli, Before I go ahead and do that, here's one other alternative. From maintain.texi: Small supporting files, short manuals (under 300 lines long) and rough documentation (README files, INSTALL files, etc) can use a simple all-permissive license like this one: Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification, are permitted in any medium without royalty provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved. I think this applies to observers.texi; how about you? If you'd prefer it to be covered by the GFDL, I'll inquire with the FSF. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery