This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GFDL/GPL issues

On 08/04/2010 10:52 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Alfred M. Szmidt<> 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.

Actually, I do see the point in the Front/Back cover texts. A manual is not a program, and those are not the same thing as the BSD advertising clause. Invariant Sections are debatable but we all know why they exist.

However, until there is a possibility to relicense anything GPL->GFDL I cannot disagree. In fact, since the GFDL is more restrictive, it is the same thing as the Affero GPL.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]