Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2012
demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> wrote on Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:38:14 +0100: >On 28 February 2012 01:14, Tom Christiansen <tchrist@perl.com> wrote: >> 'di' >If this is going to be included in the perl core that should be changed to 1. What, you don't like I spell "die"? :) As Nick correctly surmised, that was just an updated wrapman-wrapped podpage. I did it just for my convenience, because I wanted to make sure that pod2text was doing the right thing, and I got tired of typing options. Here's the real thing. It also helped, or was supposed to help, in an unrelated matter that wasn't sure how to address. That of the copyright and licence. Except for the final program and the Unihan recipe, the examples are almost 100% lifted directly out of Camel4. Neither O'Reilly nor the book's authors have any interest in "protecting" the code examples from the copyrighted book against being used in people's programs. Indeed, O'Reilly always puts the extracted code up for everyone to download even if they don't buy the book. This has always been important to me. That's also why I make updates before to the online docset before I update books, so that the wording changes originate from an open source repository rather than going the other way around. But in this case, I had no chance, because the book saw print before the manpage got created. (BTW, it came back from the printer yesterday.) At the same time, I don't think anybody would be happy to see someone lift all the example code and publish their own printed book using those. I wanted to try to find some middle ground that encouraged code reuse by regular programmers while avoiding giving even tacit encouragement of any sort of scoundrelly that would rouse sleeping lawyers. So that's why I used the "This program is free software" licence. But to do that, I had to make it a program, which a podpage is not — at least, not normally. By making it a program, I felt I could grab at the free software licence. I welcome any and all alternate proposals that achieve the same goals with less pussyfooting rigamarole. Thanks, --tomThread Previous | Thread Next