Re: [Savannah-hackers] submission of NetHack Proxy - savannah.nongnu.org

[J. Ali Harlow]

On 17/12/04 12:16:44, Jonathan Gonzalez V. wrote:
> "J. Ali Harlow" <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Hi J. Ali Harlow,

Hi Jonathan. I found your email a little hard to follow. Perhaps you  
should consider using an inline style of quoting. It would make it much  
easier to relate your comments to the part of my email to which they  
refer. I've guessed as best I can.

> You should follow that recommendation and license all your examples,
> this will keep the freedom even in your documentation.

In hindsight, I've decided to simplify this a little and just release  
all example code as public domain. In the unlikely event that somebody  
decides to write a commercial external interface for NetHack I'd like  
to help rather than hinder them.

> No so complicated as you think, you just have to include the  
> Copyright Notices and the little License Notices after the tittle. As  
> you can read in the fdl-howto, you just have to put the license  
> notices in the main file of your document(maybe nhproxy-docs.sgml?),  
> if you cannot include the copyright notices in all other files(maybe  
> you should try to find if gtk-doc can do this), you can create a file  
> called 'DOCS.LICENSE' and include here, the copyright and the little  
> license notices for all other files.

I've added a copyright notice to nhproxy-docs.sgml and a copy of  
fdl.xml to the reference manual. gtk-doc has a very simple format for  
the template files so I am not able to add any copyright or license  
notices to the files in tmpl. I couldn't find any information on the  
web about using a DOCS.LICENSE file, so I would be grateful if you  
could either provide a URL or give a quick example of what such a file  
might contain and which directory it should be placed (doc/reference or  
doc/reference/tmpl I assume).

> Well, I'm not really sure how gtk-doc works, but if just take  
> comments and functions names, should not be a problem, because you  
> aren't linking the doc with the source code, so should not be a  
> problem.

That's about the size of it, yes.

> The file doc/ext_protocol.html, should keep the NGPL license.

Done. I've had an educated guess as to the correct copyright notice and  
sent an email to the NetHack developers to clarify. I'll change this if  
it turns out I was mistaken.

> Well, that's the main idea, but you include the GPL license notices
> not the LGPL license notices. Remember that you cannot forget the
> Copyright notices ;).

Here's where my guessing as to what your comments relate to falls down.  
If this comment is still relevant, please re-state it a little clearer.

> Related to the last line in license notices, can you please remove  
> the opensource.org reference? we want to avoid any confusion with  
> Free Software and Open Source. You can put this link:
>
>          http://www.nethack.org/common/license.html

Done (and also in license.txt).

> Sorry, I didn't see that file, no problem you just have to include  
> the verbatim copy of the license.

Thanks.

> There's no problem in keep the current copyright holder, if your are
> going to release it as a team, is ok :).

I've sent an email to the members of the Slash'EM development team to  
ask them to explicitly give their permissions. Warren and Pekka have  
already replied. I imagine Clive and Paul will do so fairly shortly.

nhproxy version 0.8.3 and latest TODO list attached.

Cheers,

Ali.

nhproxy-0.8.3.tar.gz
Description: application/compressed-tar

TODO
Description: Text document