Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En réponse à Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Emacs embbeds an info reader and makes possible to browse such > > > documentation. There is no link in the code AFAIK. > > > > It was argued in > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200304/msg00169.html > > OK. I meant linked as with software, there is no code linking to > documentation.
I'm not so sure. The Info file isn't dumped raw into a buffer for display. The info files provides offsets to each Info node such that a browser that quickly jump to any Node and display only that node. Look at the contents of /usr/share/info/emacs-21/emacs.gz and tell me that Info files don't provide hooks to software. > But I understand now that the binaries and al. > cannot come along with the documentation. > > > > > I think it's shortsighted to put documentation onto a pedestal > > > > out of the reach of software. What happens if I want to merge > > > > this documentation into software? > > > > > > I don't know. How do software licenses deal with such a case? > > > > I don't understand the question. Such a case of merging software > > into other software? Well, the GPL allows that in GPL-compatible > > derived works _without_ including invariant bits of code. > > No, code + documentation. I'm still not sure I understand the question. Do does a software license handle mixing code and documentation? Well, release the Emacs manual under the GPL and I can create derived works that combine both under the GPL. I may extract bits from the manual to make balloon help texts, or to make quick help texts under a menu. In those cases I obviously wouldn't include the GNU manifesto along with my short excerpts. But I'm not a vilain. So if I redistributed the manual, I'd leave it intact and the manifesto would stay in. It would be common sense rather than being forced-to in compliance with the license. Peter
