My concerns about GPLv3 process

Alfred M. Szmidt ams at
Wed Feb 1 17:51:41 UTC 2006

   > Because PGP was software, not documentation.  Such a clause would
   > be prefectly ok for free documentation.

   Again: Documentation is part of the software.

It _can_ be part of the program, but for Emacs and the GNU C library
and other works, this isn't the case.  They are two seperatly licensed
entities.  PGP as a whole was licensed under a non-free software

   > You can ask the FSF to make a execption for examples.  This makes
   > sense, and I doubt anyone would object.

   I tried to tell that there are 48 lines of actual description (a
   work) plus some more lines with examples.

What was the result?


More information about the Discussion mailing list