Re: What is the license of generated files?

+legal-list, any suggestions?


On 02/04/2013 11:03 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
On 12/14/2012 01:11 PM, David Nečas wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:54:13PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be
fine with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with

I hope that whatever license is chosen it is meant to be be dual with
GNU GPL under which they are implicitly licensed now.  GNU FDL is a
peculiar license, incompatible with GNU GPL(!) and in some variants
verging on non-free, whether cleared by or not.  If the
files were GNU FDL license I am afraid many would nave to look for
replacements under a different license.

Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing
them. It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate

As someone who likes the current images and their current license I
wonder what is the best way to keep them used when the documentation of
my projects is compiled.


Any progress on this?  This is potentially a serious issue.  Should I
open a bug against gtk docs?

GPL would be unacceptable from our stand-point for documentation.  I
think the best solution would be that the owner of the documentation
gets to decide how to license the generated files (i.e. they purposely
have no license information).

The icons still need to be dealt with.

-- Jeff

gtk-doc-list mailing list
gtk-doc-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]