Re: Attention GCJ devel team

[Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>]

James Williams wrote:

>For myself I'm not convinced that generating the javadoc would violate any
>copyright for the following reasons.
>
>1.  deprecation is a part of the specification and deprecation is part of
>the javadoc, so how can the javadoc be excluded?
>

The @deprecated tags (and, perhaps, the @since version tags) are a 
special case. They may be used buy the compiler, so you could argue that 
they must be reproduced in order to properly implement the API. Thus, I 
think it is ok to include those.

>2.  In the license that I agreed to Sun granted me a license for the
>specification (which includes all of the javadocs) and nowhere within the
>license does it state that I don't have the freedom to recreate the javadoc.
>

The documentation is Sun's copyrighted work. We use that documentation 
to produce an implementation of the Java API. However, like any book, we 
cannot simply copy the contents and pass it off as our own.

regards

Bryce.