My concerns about GPLv3 process
Alfred M. Szmidt
ams at gnu.org
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