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

Re: license change for POSIX manpages

* Josh Triplett:

> Agreed.  "In the text" could imply "right next to where you differ from
> the standard", which would probably be unreasonable enough to be
> non-free.  Without the "in the text", modifiers could simply add a
> blanket notice somewhere in the distributed work saying "this has been
> changed and may not match the POSIX standard", which is a reasonable
> requirement.

They probably want to avoid that someone puts the markers into an
nroff comment.

(We could actually add the markers and provide a patched groff to hide
them again.)

> One other issue: does "and the nroff source is included" mean that if I
> want to hand someone a printed copy of a manual page, I have to either
> print the nroff source or supply it on an attached disk?  This seems
> onerous for physical distribution.

This is what happens if you apply the GPL to documentation, and it
seems to be considered acceptable.

Current mail filters: many dial-up/DSL/cable modem hosts, and the
following domains: bigpond.com, di-ve.com, fuorissimo.com, hotmail.com,
jumpy.it, libero.it, netscape.net, postino.it, simplesnet.pt, spymac.com,
tiscali.co.uk, tiscali.cz, tiscali.it, voila.fr, yahoo.com.

Reply to: