This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GFDL/GPL issues
- From: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: ams at gnu dot org
- Cc: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, bonzini at gnu dot org, Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com, bkoz at redhat dot com, paul_koning at dell dot com, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu, dnovillo at google dot com, dewar at adacore dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, iant at google dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 22:52:45 +0200
- Subject: Re: GFDL/GPL issues
- References: <4C5195FA.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4C52B176.email@example.com> <4C52E1C0.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4C53696B.email@example.com> <4C536B50.firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTikQ_ajAfJu8LkCjCP_tVBmZOkNgXFNmFHAMzTiY@mail.gmail.com> <11008022317.AA08984@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <E5A51D93-66B1-40E1-8431-34F8F11E5E6D@dell.com> <20100803162022.GU17485@synopsys.com> <20100804002105.744fb6af@shotwell> <20100804164618.GX17485@synopsys.com> <E1Oghrf-0001JK-3B@fencepost.gnu.org> <4C59B33A.email@example.com> <E1Ogj0w-0007yt-HW@fencepost.gnu.org> <AANLkTikJtCTp5FQm0BeOXKONPKqyMOkH7fkKY1f+CWX8@mail.gmail.com> <E1OgkBZ-0002pZ-9C@fencepost.gnu.org>
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Alfred M. Szmidt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> ? > I have read the thread in full, and I do not see the problem with
> ? > keeping that info in a seperate manual; GCC has so many options
> ? > for various architectures and systems that I think it makes
> ? > technical sense to have a "Invoking GCC" manual.
> ? And what about libstdc++ API docs, which are currently quite
> ? difficult to cross-reference with the libstdc++ manual, and cannot
> ? be included in it? ?The API docs come from C++ sources and the
> ? manual from docbook sources, so texinfo has nothing to do with it.
> For a API reference listing document, it would make more sense to
> license the work under the GPL, is that possible?
> There is no rule in the GNU project that all types of documentation
> must be licensed under the GFDL. ?Sometimes it makes sense, good
> examples are the gccint, gcc and the emacs manual, and sometimes it
> might not like for API reference listings.
I can't see how the GFDL "makes sense" for anything.