--- Clemens Fruhwirth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip] > Hence, it _is_ possible to shell out this copyright issue > with a bit of technological tricks. But when I think about > it, this is actually ok, as the patches we are writting will > be our intellectual fruits. Yes and no - they would be derivative works of the content of the draft spec. > Still, I think this is only useful for small changes, let's > say 1% of the original text. Right. At the risk of heading the discussion down the wrong path again, I'm looking at more than just a few fixes to the ANSI spec - I would like to eventually produce an enhanced spec which is a Literate Programming document - both english text and lisp code woven together to form the spec itself. For this process there can be no ambiguity about the status of the text, since it becomes part of the end product. I suppose you could argue that you could untangle it but I have no desire to give any lawyers any point of attack that can be avoided, and claiming that being able to untangle the spec from the source code makes everything OK is not something I would expect to fly ;-). I'm not really keen on the process myself, but I really believe the best way to proceed is to look up the list of contributors and start writing emails. I was hoping the idea would catch the fancy of someone more logical than me to do this (I'm just a guy who likes open source, lisp, and scientific software, after all) but if I'm the only one interested enough I guess that leaves one choice... ;-) Cheers, CY __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
