This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GFDL/GPL Issue
- From: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at spamcop dot net>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 20:10:14 -0400
- Subject: Re: GFDL/GPL Issue
- References: <4C05986C.6060805@codesourcery.com>
Quoting Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>:
At this point, RMS has said, answered this question from me:
"Can we take comments (not code) from FSF-owned GPL'd code and process
them in some way that results in them being included in a GFDL'd manual?"
We also need struct member declarations.
I.e type and name. In the case of function members - as is common with
hooks - that includes return type and the types of all arguments; moreover,
we also want the names of the function arguments.
As we move to C++, that might morph to class members / member functions.
So, my question is this: is the permission above sufficient for what
people want to do at this point? Or do we need more? And if we need
more (as I suspect), can we be specific about what toolflow we want to
follow and what content will be generated? It would help if I could
show RMS inputs and outputs, not just with some random example, but with
GCC itself. Is someone willing to apply enough effort to produce at
least some fragments of documentation using some method, and document
that method for me, so that I can provide it to RMS.
See:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg02255.html
Search for GPL and/or GFDL for a sample of things that we currently
can't fix due to licensing issues.