Re: Gnus Manual License
[Why is this discussion on debian-emacsen?]
Hubert Chan <hubert@uhoreg.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:29:21 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> said:
>
> >>> Then add "changed outside the GNU project" after it, and nobody need
> >>> ever add another line in order to keep it true.
> >>
> >> "A GNU Manual" "changed outside the GNU project" -- it still claims
> >> to be a GNU manual.
>
> > Then add "(at one time)" after it if that suits you better.
>
> (Of course, this puts the FSF in a rather odd situation, if they ever
> want to take parts of "'A GNU Manual' '(at one time)'" and incorporate
> it back into their own work. Then again, the FSF requires copyright
> assignment for GNU software, which would allow them to do anything they
> want with it, so I guess they don't care too much about this particular
> case.)
That's a recurrent theme with FSF licensing. When I pointed out that
having a different license for Emacs add-on code and its documentation
prevented people from cut and pasting doc strings into Emacs source as
help strings, RMS replied that it didn't matter because the FSF owns the
copyright to both and so can do that. But that doesn't give forks the
same privilege. That's a problem with the old doc license as well, since
it wasn't the GPL either.
--
Peter
Reply to: