texi2html-bug
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Texi2html-bug] Re: about public domain code in texi2html


From: Derek Price
Subject: [Texi2html-bug] Re: about public domain code in texi2html
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:21:22 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> The code in texi2html.init is currently public domain, and so is the
> code in examples/*.init (I am the author), except maybe for
> mediawiki.init which has been mainly written by Derek.
>
> I think that it is better if it stays that way, to avoid licensing
> issues when people cut and paste code from init files to customize

I hadn't given it any memorable thought previously, but I don't see why
the init files should need to be in the public domain.  Even assuming
they were currently GPL'd (as I had assumed, but not analyzed nor
explicitly intended to release mediawiki.init under) nothing should
prevent users from copy & pasting - the new init file generated thereby
just must be GPL'd as well, if distributed.

Perl's Artistic License falls somewhere in between public domain and the
GPL.  As I understand things, the short list of significant differences
with the GPL is: it doesn't require users to release distributed changes
under a free license unless released with the same script names, and it
generally interprets binaries and scripts that are linked with/run by
the original as input and so doesn't require they adopt its license.
The short list of significant differences from the public domain is a
few protections for the authors (a warranty disclaimer and an
endorsement disclaimer) and the aforementioned protection for the
original name of the package (so someone modifying Texinfo.pm, for
instance, if they chose to distribute their copy, would have to
distribute their version under a different name or allow us to use their
changes).

Anyhow, I feel a little safer with the author protections and I don't
think it hurts anybody to protect the names we choose for our scripts to
this extent (and thereby protect our users from confusion about the
authors).  What advantage do you see to having those scripts in the
public domain?

Derek
-- 
Derek R. Price
Solutions Architect
Ximbiot, LLC <http://ximbiot.com>
Get CVS and Subversion Support from Ximbiot!

v: +1 248.835.1260
f: +1 248.246.1176




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]