From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17792 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2009 18:54:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 17780 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2009 18:54:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BOTNET,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout1.012.net.il (HELO mtaout1.012.net.il) (84.95.2.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:54:33 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout1.012.net.il by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KRE00M00ZZPS000@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:53:46 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.84.229]) by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KRF006JI0HKZA70@i-mtaout1.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:53:45 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:54:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Documentation generated from sources proposal In-reply-to: To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83ws30igr5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20091012161424.GA20603@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 > From: Tom Tromey > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:12:25 -0600 > > >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: > > Jan> May the GDB project start using some tool to format documentation > Jan> from the sources? One could move the appropriate parts of > Jan> gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo into gdb/*.c along the patches being > Jan> submitted, keeping in gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo only the abstract > Jan> parts in the future. > > I would like to do this, but my understanding is that there is a > licensing problem, in that the source is GPL and the documentation is > GFDL. (Joseph Myers has mentioned this several times on the GCC lists.) Then how come libiberty and other packages do that? I'd suggest to clear this up with RMS. > Apparently we got some kind of special permission for observer.texi, so > I suppose it is possible in principle. observer.texi is not documentation, it's code written in Texinfo.