On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:36 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net> writes: > > > [...] > > So what should I do? > > [...] > > c. change the licenses of the melt*texi files [I certainly won't do that > > without explicit approval] to something compatible. Perhaps the fact > > that I am the only contributor to these files might help. > > Would dual-licensing the .texi files (GFDL + GPL3) solve these problems?
Maybe (but one of them is generated from *.melt source files), but I have absolutely no idea of who can permit me to change the licenses of the files. In my understanding, their copyright belongs to FSF (not to my employer CEA or me), and I would imagine that getting the FSF to accept such a license change might be as difficult and as long-lasting as having FSF solve the "global" issue. Besides, GCC MELT is a branch that I would imagine is not the prime interest of the FSF. To be more rude, I am probably the only one who really cares about that branch, and I have no influence on the FSF. My dream [I'm not sure it can happen] would be that some GCC steering committee member would just say here to me that dual-licensing such and such files is permitted and would solve any issue. If I had such a informal "blessing" I would be ok. Cheers. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
