From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Borkowski Subject: Re: Org-mode exporters licensing Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:52:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87r3ntvmuq.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <87io962fdz.fsf@mbork.pl> <87a8uigff8.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87a8ui2cxl.fsf@mbork.pl> <87twsqeyku.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53155) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgxk-0005xq-Jz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:52:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgxg-00082h-Gd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:52:56 -0400 Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([2a01:5e00:2:52::8]:39250) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgxg-00082b-9O for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:52:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97E1B8F2003 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:52:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BpNKs3kiIlwI for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:52:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (unknown [109.232.24.146]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DC568F2002 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:52:49 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: <87twsqeyku.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Org-Mode mailing list On 2015-07-27, at 11:31, Eric S Fraga wrote: > On Monday, 27 Jul 2015 at 10:59, Marcin Borkowski wrote: > > [...] > >> See how stupid this whole copyright law swamp is? >> >> What if I reuse just the basic structure of sentences in the docstrings, >> like in "Subject + verb + preposition + object"? Do I have to use GPL >> then, too? ;-) >> >> And what if I reuse the naming convention of the functions, but to make >> life easier, I'll just copy large fragments of code and do >> a query-replace on them? (This is serious.) > > Yes, this whole issue can be quite messy. The GPL is somewhat viral in > nature and was (probably, arguably) intended to be so. Laudable goals > but sometimes overbearing but let's no go there... Yes, it's not the discussion I'd like to get into now. > My view would be that if you use any of org code and you want to release > that code to the outside world, you will need to license the result > under GPL. Given your intent to make your code public domain, this is > not a bad way to go in any case. I disagree. Licensing a tutorial with GPL is a stupid thing to do. A tutorial may contain code which people naturally mimic (or even copy). Such things should definitely be in PD. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University