GPL works just great for documentation

Posted Jul 1, 2010 8:39 UTC (Thu) by mjthayer (guest, #39183)
In reply to: GPL works just great for documentation by liljencrantz
Parent article: Two GCC stories

> The problem is that documentation comments are embedded within the source code, potentially in _any_ file. You either have to dual license the entire project under the GFDL, or make a silly clause like «any comment anywhere in the source code is also licensed under the GFDL», something that I doubt you're allowed to do.

It works if you apply the policy before you start creating documentation comments, which would make some sense. Then you just reject patches that don't comply.

Or if you mark "approved" documentation comments in some way.

to post comments

GPL works just great for documentation

Posted Jul 1, 2010 10:17 UTC (Thu) by liljencrantz (guest, #28458) [Link] (2 responses)

Sounds like a maintenance nightmare, pure and simple.

GPL works just great for documentation

Posted Jul 1, 2010 11:20 UTC (Thu) by sflintham (guest, #47422) [Link] (1 responses)

Dual-licensing all the code under GPLv3 and GFDL wouldn't be a maintenance burden though. And since the FSF requires copyright assignments, this should be easy. What would be wrong with this solution? Would having the code available under a GFDL licence grant any undesirable options to anyone?

GPL works just great for documentation

Posted Jul 2, 2010 15:50 UTC (Fri) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]

If the documentation was available under the GPL then others would be able to distribute it without including the propaganda that the GFDL forces you to leave in.