From owner-freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Wed Nov 16 14:48:03 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF44C45DD3 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:48:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kaduk@mit.edu) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu [18.7.68.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6E351878 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:48:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kaduk@mit.edu) X-AuditID: 12074425-16bff700000058d7-2e-582c706c08fb Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 14.98.22743.C607C285; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 09:42:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id uAGEgphS031784; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 09:42:52 -0500 Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id uAGEgmOn025027 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 09:42:51 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:42:49 -0600 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Fehmi Noyan ISI Cc: "freebsd-doc@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Updating the ieee80211(9) manual page Message-ID: <20161116144248.GA86797@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <1689921305.1664375.1478815163976.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1689921305.1664375.1478815163976@mail.yahoo.com> <20161110220347.GM91607@kduck.kaduk.org> <1573107513.800805.1479268173950@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1573107513.800805.1479268173950@mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrptToBNh8HGRlsWeqT/YLE6d6WJ1 YPKY8Wk+i8esWYeZApiiuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDJOr/3MXNDGUfH31HK2BsYNbF2MnBwSAiYS 9//1sHcxcnEICbQxSSxoXsQM4WxklDi2eTKUc5VJ4tTrlSwgLSwCqhKfHs9nBLHZBFQkGrov M4PYIgKaEi/f/wQbyyxgLvH31TYmEFtYwEhi3tl1YHFeoHX9q/+xQgy9zCix4s5FdoiEoMTJ mU9YIJq1JG78ewnUzAFkS0ss/8cBEuYUsJVo+LcSbK+ogLJEw4wHzBMYBWYh6Z6FpHsWQvcC RuZVjLIpuVW6uYmZOcWpybrFyYl5ealFuhZ6uZkleqkppZsYwYHqorqDcc5fr0OMAhyMSjy8 C9S1I4RYE8uKK3MPMUpyMCmJ8r4L1YkQ4kvKT6nMSCzOiC8qzUktPsQowcGsJMK7Lgcox5uS WFmVWpQPk5LmYFES5/3v9jVcSCA9sSQ1OzW1ILUIJivDwaEkwXsvH6hRsCg1PbUiLTOnBCHN xMEJMpwHaPgskBre4oLE3OLMdIj8KUZFKXFeyQyghABIIqM0D64XlEgksvfXvGIUB3pFmLcR pJ0HmITgul8BDWYCGrxHAGxwSSJCSqqBsSs5ipk39rmdrlsKo2TD7QNf+Su5Tea0Oh38/eN7 2oaV3ar2XtfKN8WbHXpfoS5jKJm2PvPDuhkb56qsd5TddERwf7vB41usD+cq9ZQu/rR/w9Ta O6WZmy484snhXXy8gOHMn/js4Fdbjh/OenBYehe/fOJJk3YemavfdtY/VomVeZw3cWKChRJL cUaioRZzUXEiAEY/AP3/AgAA X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:48:03 -0000 On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:49:33AM +0000, Fehmi Noyan ISI wrote: > Thanks Benjamin, > > Both NetBSD [1] and FreeBSD [2] versions of ieee80211.9 manual pages have been licensed with a 2-cluase BSD license by their respective authors. > > > If I update the FreeBSD ieee80211(9) man page with the information from ieee80211(9) man page from NetBSD, what should the license look like? > > Would something similar to one given below be OK? > > > .\" Copyright (c) 2004 Bruce M. Simpson > .\" Copyright (c) 2004 Darron Broad > .\" Copyright (c) 2009 Sam Leffler, Errno Consulting > .\" All rights reserved. > ... rest of the license comes here Yes, that's the right thing to do. > Also, in the HISTORY part, is it worth mentioning that the (FreeBSD) manual page was updated with the information from NetBSD IEEE80211 man page? I would not insist on it if a submission appeared that did not include such a mention, but it is better to have it present than absent. -Ben