Thanks for reaching out, Brad. I want to handle this the way it was done for gzip. Any objection to this change?
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Greg McGary <greg.mcg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I must have had some hand in initial authorship of the info manual, though > it has been so many years now, I can't say how much it has changed over the > years. In any case, I am willing to dual-license whatever might be my part. > > G > > > On 08/10/13 18:24, Brad Bosch wrote: > > Looks like I had some old email addresses for Jim, Greg, and Tom. Here is > another try. But I can't find another address for Tom. Is anyone still in > contact with him? > > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Brad Bosch <brad112...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Gentlemen, >> >> I am the Debian developer who has maintained the id-utils package for many >> years. Some time ago, it was brought to my attention that the current >> idutils documentation license is not compatible with Debian policy because >> of the invariant first and last pages/section. I understand that the FSF >> has been rather inflexible in this regard with other packages. >> >> The documentation has been removed from recent versions of the package to >> allow it to continue to be a part of the Debian distribution, but I would >> like to be able to restore it to the package. I could create a new >> documentation only package and place it in the non-free Debian package >> archive, but this is inconvenient and potentially confusing for users and >> extra work for me. I know that the documentation was once explicitly not >> copyrighted, so I suppose I could also locate and adopt an older version, >> but this is clearly not ideal and also involves duplicated effort to update >> the old version to some extent. >> >> I understand that the FSF allows authors to dual license their work under >> the GPL. I am unsure if all of you are considered document authors or even >> if I may have missed someone. Can you clarify the actual authorship of the >> document for me please? If you are a copyright worthy author, are you >> willing to dual-license your idutils documentation under some version of the >> GPL? >> >> Thanks in advance for any help you can provide in this matter! >> >> --Brad Bosch >> b...@debian.org >> brad112...@gmail.com >> >> > > >
From 7c3c6bbc8f35e9b2fd9fd9730451b53213eb47cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering <j...@meyering.net> Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 08:52:20 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] doc: remove idutils.texi front- and back-cover text requirements * doc/idutils.texi: Do not require front- or back-cover text, thus making this section the same as gzip's, so this may be included in Debian's "free" (rather than non-free) archive. --- doc/idutils.texi | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/idutils.texi b/doc/idutils.texi index 47bfbff..0343bfd 100644 --- a/doc/idutils.texi +++ b/doc/idutils.texi @@ -43,10 +43,9 @@ Inc. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no -Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU -Manual'', and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the -license is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation -License'' in the Emacs manual. +Invariant Sections, with no Front-Cover Texts, and with no Back-Cover +Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled ``GNU +Free Documentation License'' in the Emacs manual. (a) The FSF's Back-Cover Text is: ``You have freedom to copy and modify this GNU Manual, like GNU software. Copies published by the Free -- 1.8.4.rc0.11.g35f5eaa
_______________________________________________ bug-idutils mailing list bug-idutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-idutils
