Re: Could /Documentation/technical/commit-graph.txt be relicensed under a permissive license?
- From
Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
- Date
- Dec 10, 2019, 20:38 UTC
- Message-ID
- <70575b23-6adb-a29b-8df8-f9099f86eb0e@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqimmoq6vw.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
On 12/10/2019 3:10 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> KOLANICH <kolan_n@mail.ru> writes:
I don't appear to have the original message? Perhaps it was directly addressed to Junio?
Show 10 quoted lines
>> ... the license of git itself is GPL, so I am not >> allowed to use these 2 files to create an own permissive-licensed >> tool reading this file. > > It is a wrong conclusion, isn't it? > > GPL copyright protects the expression of the document, but the > copyright protects only the expression, and does not protect the > underlying format itself and the idea behind it. So I do not see a > need to relicense the documentation text at all.
(Insert "I am not a lawyer" warning.)
I think this is the correct interpretation. One can interact with binary files as you want. In fact, there are likely privately licensed products that interact with Git's pack-files even though their format documentation is under GPL.
What _could_ be problematic is repeating the documentation directly in another permissive-licensed repository.
Thanks, -Stolee