From: "Brian Schröder" <ruby.brian@...>
Date: 2005-10-21T17:12:51+09:00
Subject: Re: Why Write Ruby Docs? (was Re: [SUMMARY] Text Image (#50))

On 20/10/05, James Britt <james_b@neurogami.com> wrote:
> Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> > James Britt wrote:
> >
> >>>Documentation of core and library classs is written in the source code
> >>>(be it C or Ruby).  Thus to contribute, you want to avail yourself of
> >>>(anonymous) CVS access (it's easy).  Then you edit files, create a
> >>>patch, and get it committed.  That last step has been the problem in
> >>>the past; mea culpa.  Suggested process: email the patch to me and/or
> >>>James Gray (sorry, James!).  Bug me mercilessly if nothing's being
> >>>done.
> >>
> >>BTW, what is the copyright on submitted docs, and is it made clear to
> >>those submitting documentation?
> >
> >
> > I have no idea what the copyright situation is.  Of the few people who
> > have submitted documentation, none have raised the question of
> > copyright.
> >
> > Is there a reason to believe the documentation is treated differently
> > from the source code of which it's part?  If the documentation is "Ruby
> > Licence", which I expect it is, what implication does that have for
> > copyright?
> >
>
>
> Could someone sell a book that included the text from the std-lib docs?
>   Would the book have to be released under Ruby's license (whatever that
> means)?
>

The Pickaxe pp. 653-759

brian

>
> James Britt
>
> --
>
> http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
> http://www.rubyxml.com  - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
> http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
> http://www.jamesbritt.com  - Playing with Better Toys
>
>


--
http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/

Stringed instrument chords: http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/