public inbox for libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Koning, Paul" <Paul.Koning@dell.com>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Cc: libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: Update documentation about copyright and GPL notices in tests
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 16:44:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <C0DB2140-E1C7-497E-83E7-1E70ED70E88C@dell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220428123725.2354675-1-jwakely@redhat.com>



> On Apr 28, 2022, at 8:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> I intend to commit this patch soon. This isn't changing the policy, just
> adjusting the docs to match the current policy.
> 
> I'm open to suggestions for better ways to phrase the second sentence,
> clarifying that our tests generally have nothing novel or "authored".
> 
> -- >8 --
> 
> There is no need to require FSF copyright for tests that are just
> "self-evident" ways to check the API and behaviour of the library.
> This is consistent with tests for the compiler, which do not have
> copyright and licence notices either.

So is the theory that "self-evident" documents are in the public domain for that reason?  Or is the policy that for such file it is fine for the copyright to be held by the author (which is the default when no assignment is made)?  And a similar question applies to the license aspect also.

I think I understand the intent, and that seems to make sense, but I'm wondering if it has been verified by the appropriate FSF IP lawyers.

	paul


  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-28 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-28 12:37 Jonathan Wakely
2022-04-28 16:44 ` Koning, Paul [this message]
2022-04-28 17:02   ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-05-06 13:44     ` Jonathan Wakely

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=C0DB2140-E1C7-497E-83E7-1E70ED70E88C@dell.com \
    --to=paul.koning@dell.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jwakely@redhat.com \
    --cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).