[darcs-users] darcs patch: Note first batch of openssl license exceptions granted.

[Eric Y. Kow]

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 03:45:20 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> The Makefile definitely must be taken into account.  The FSF has
> always maintained that Makefiles and other project-specific build
> infrastructure are part of "the source" for a program.

Duly noted
 
> In a copyleft project maintaining a self-documenting program, all
> documentation should be under the same license (including multiple
> licensing) as the source, or you find yourself in the embarrassing
> position of requiring downstream to get your permission to copy
> verbatim from your manual to augment your help strings, and vice
> versa.  (Cf. advice given in the FDL, for example.  The FDL assumes
> it's only a problem doc->src, but this example makes it clear that the
> problem is symmetric.)

Ah, so as you said in an earlier mail (I finally got around to perusing
that thread from 2005), there are no minor changes.

Sigh... so much for 'great! I've narrowed it down to 20 people' Oh well.
At least we have documented the current batch of 'yes'es so that in case
I give up or something else happens to me, we'll at least be halfway
along.

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20080609/7e90afac/attachment.pgp