From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271909AbTGRWg1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:36:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271903AbTGRWfn (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:35:43 -0400 Received: from mailhost.tue.nl ([131.155.2.7]:61963 "EHLO mailhost.tue.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270373AbTGRWdi (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:33:38 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:48:33 +0200 From: Andries Brouwer To: Michael Still Cc: Alan Cox , Sam Ravnborg , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andries Brouwer Subject: Re: [PATCH] docbook: Added support for generating man files Message-ID: <20030719004833.A3174@pclin040.win.tue.nl> References: <1058565240.19558.91.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from mikal@stillhq.com on Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:36:27AM +1000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:36:27AM +1000, Michael Still wrote: > > IS there any chance it could incorporate the GPL by a slightly smaller > > reference or even a link for the HTML one, it looks great except that > > 90% of the manual page is a GPL each time 8) > Well, the only part which comes from this patch is: > ... Michael Still (mikal\@stillhq.com) ... > ... This documentation was generated with kernel version $ARGV[2]. ... > I can shorten this if people would like. Commenting on the man page (nroff) version: Please put the mikal\@stillhq.com in a comment. Please leave the kernel version. > The GPL bit people have commented on is actually extracted from the front > matter of the SGML file being converted inside > . Therefore, if the SGML kerneldoc output we > already have includes the GPL, then so does the man page. I have not > imposed new license conditions on the documentation. > > If people are comfortable with dropping the legal notice, or perhaps > inserting a line saying "refer to file X for the license on this > documentation", then I'll do that and send a new patch. Please put all legalities in comments - behind .\" we do not have to read them, but they are there if anyone cares. Andries