Re: Using portions of GNU Manuals in other manuals
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Using portions of GNU Manuals in other manuals
- From: Peter S Galbraith <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 17:32:57 -0400
- Message-id: <4075.1064784777@mixed>
- In-reply-to: Message from Anthony DeRobertis <firstname.lastname@example.org> of "Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:33:55 EDT." <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20030928192255.GJ501@deadbeast.net> <email@example.com>
Anthony DeRobertis <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 15:22, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Interesting. Do you think this may be an intended consequence?
> I have no reason to believe so. Hopefully in a day or two, RMS will
> clarify (to me at least).
> > It would certainly serve to discourage forking.
> I hope RMS realizes that egcs was certainly a good thing, and doesn't
> try to (legally) prevent forking in the future.
Then consider that the FSF, as copyright holder, are the only ones able
to cut and paste text between the GPL'ed program and the GFDL'ed
documention of that same program. It certainly is a barrier to forks.
This is why we in the MH-E project decided to relicense our manual from
the GFDL to the GPL (well, I brought it up, but others understood the
issue and supported it). We may dual-license it soon.