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
license.

   > 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?

Cheers.



More information about the Discussion mailing list