> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:19:19 -0600 (MDT)
> From: Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> +The @file{INSTALL} file is free documentation; the Free Software
> +Foundation gives unlimited permission to copy, distribute and modify it.
>
> There are two possibilities. If the file is big enough, it should use
> the GFDL. Otherwise, what you have in mind is basically right, but
> this isn't the right way to word it. How big is the file?
It's currently 226 lines, 1366 words, and 9221 bytes.
We have some backward-compatibility concerns here. The current
autoconf manual says "A plain-text version of `INSTALL' which you may
use comes with Autoconf." I take this to be permission for people to
copy `INSTALL' into non-free software distributions, just as these
people can copy other files like 'configure' (which contains a
permission like the above-quoted lines) and 'install-sh' (which has an
X-like license).
If we change `INSTALL' to use the GFDL, then copy of the GFDL must be
included with non-free software distributions that have `INSTALL', and
this may so much of a hassle for a relatively small file like
`INSTALL' that non-free distributions will stop redistributing the
file. (This might turn into a public-relations issue, I suppose.)
One possibility is to shrink `INSTALL' to be quite short, something
like this:
To build this package, invoke `./configure' and then `make'.
For details, please see <http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/INSTALL>.
This would solve the GFDL problem, but it has some disadvantages:
* More load on the GNU web server.
* More hassle if the installer can't currently access the GNU web server.
* Problems with autoconf version mismatch (unless we put a version
number into that URL).
* More maintenance hassles for the GNU webmasters.
If you like this idea I can easily come up with a patch to implement
it, but the rest of this message assumes that we don't use this idea.
I see two other issues:
1. The permissions wording I proposed (quoted at the start of this
message) gives unlimited permission to copy `INSTALL', but it
grants no permission to copy the source file `install.texi' that
`INSTALL' is generated from.
2. The autoconf manual uses the GFDL, and it includes `install.texi'
as a section. If we insert a reference to the GFDL into the
mainline text of `install.texi', the section will contain a
seemingly-unrelated copyright notice that will confuse the reader.
(2) is a more general problem; e.g., it applies to `make-stds.texi',
which is shared between `autoconf' and `make', and which currently has
no copyright notice whatsoever. (I plan to look at make-stds.texi
once we've resolved install.texi.)
Here's a revised patch that attempts to address (1) and (2) for
install.texi, by inserting a reference to the GFDL as a comment. This
would mean that `INSTALL' has unlimited permissions, but other
derivatives of `install.texi' would be under the GFDL. What do you
think of this approach?
--- ../autoconf-2.52b/doc/install.texi Tue Jul 17 09:34:55 2001
+++ doc/install.texi Mon Aug 13 11:13:08 2001
@@ -256,3 +256,28 @@ Look for the package's source code in di
@noindent
@code{configure} also accepts some other, not widely useful, options.
Run @samp{configure --help} for more details.
+
+@node INSTALL Copyright Notice
+@section Copyright Notice for the @file{INSTALL} File
+
+Copyright 1994, 1995, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+
+The @file{INSTALL} file is free documentation; the Free Software
+Foundation gives unlimited permission to copy, distribute and modify it.
+
+@c The following notice applies to the install.texi file itself:
+
+@c Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
+@c under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1
+@c or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation;
+@c with no Invariant Sections, with no
+@c Front-Cover Texts, and with no Back-Cover Texts.
+@c A copy of the license is included in the section entitled ``GNU
+@c Free Documentation License''.
+
+@c As a conseqence of the above, this document can be included in a
+@c larger document that is distributed under the terms of the same license.
+@c The larger document must contain a copy of the license and
+@c should put it into section named ``GNU Free Documentation License''.
+@c One way to do this with texinfo is `@include fdl.texi', where the file
+@c fdl.texi is a copy of <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.texi>.
