This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GFDL/GPL issues
- From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- To: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- Cc: Paul Koning <paul_koning at Dell dot com>, Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>, "dnovillo at google dot com" <dnovillo at google dot com>, "ams at gnu dot org" <ams at gnu dot org>, "dewar at adacore dot com" <dewar at adacore dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "iant at google dot com" <iant at google dot com>, "mark at codesourcery dot com" <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "richard dot guenther at gmail dot com" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, "stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com" <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 00:21:05 -0700
- Subject: Re: GFDL/GPL issues
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <11007291247.AA02219@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <4C5195FA.email@example.com> <4C52B176.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4C52E1C0.email@example.com> <4C53696B.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4C536B50.email@example.com> <AANLkTikQ_ajAfJu8LkCjCP_tVBmZOkNgXFNmFHAMzTiY@mail.gmail.com> <11008022317.AA08984@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <E5A51D93-66B1-40E1-8431-34F8F11E5E6D@dell.com> <20100803162022.GU17485@synopsys.com>
> So one way to move forward is to effectively have two manuals, one
> containing traditional user-written text (GFDL), the other containing
> generated text (GPL). If you print it out as a book, the generated
> part would just appear as an appendix to the manual, it's "mere
This is not acceptable to me.
You have just described the status quo,
what we are already doing. It is very difficult to link api
references to manual references in two separate documents. What I want
to do is full integration, and not be forced into these aggregations.
And I am being denied.
I am very disheartened by this conversation. I'm actually incredulous,
exactly as expressed by Diego, that this is even an issue. These ivory
tower replies about awesome docs written by programmer-scribe-monks
for simple C interfaces that none of the email authors is in fact
writing are incredibly annoying to me, as somebody who is actually
doing this work. Let's at least give weight to the people in the gcc
community who are doing this work, ok? Or else I will stop doing it.
This should be a minor detail, not a month long thread. All we are
asking is for the permission to render GPL code as GFDL in addion to
GPL. No freedoms are being lost here dudes.