[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Source package containing HTML-only form of texinfo doc

Vincent Fourmond writes ("Source package containing HTML-only form of texinfo doc"):
>   I am currently reviewing the qtoctave package (#430731) before
> sponsoring it. The package is now in a pretty good shape, excepted with
> a problem for which I would like to have some advice: the qtoctave
> upstream source ships with HTML-only form of the octave's texinfo
> documentation, which is licensed under GPL. This documentation is
> actually not installed in any binary package (for many reasons).

Upstream are being foolish.

>   My first reaction was that shipping this was violating the GPL and
> that the documentation should be removed. However, do you think it is
> reasonable to just add a statement to debian/copyright indicating the
> authors/copyright of this document and where to find its source code
> should be enough ? This way, no repackaging would be needed.

Unfortunately that's not good enough.  Distributing the original
tarball obviously involves distributing this html manual, but
according to the GPL we are required to distribute the corresponding
source code.

We don't have a practical way to do that, so you'll have to repack the
tarball to remove the errant parts.

Note that this applies to _anyone_ who distributes the upstream
qtoctave tarball without an exactly corresponding texinfo source for
the octave documentation, _including qtoctave upstream_.  Perhaps a
mail to the FSF's GPL violation desk is in order ?  They can probably
have a quiet word with qtoctave upstream.


Reply to: