Brian, Re: GPLv3. Rest assured we are well aware of this and nothing will get integrated into Nv until OSR, Export Control and all the other checks have been passed. But we need to get this into the Vermillion build now so we can QA it, etc.
There was a bit of a push on the GPLv3 issue last week when Tim Cramer got involved and asked that eSpeak be treated as a test case by legal, so hopefully we'll see some progress on this soon. - Dermot Brian Cameron wrote: > > Willie: > > I went ahead and fixed the manpage issues. Thanks for your comments. > However, I think we have a GPLv3 issue as mentioned below still. No? > >>>> Man pages for espeak from Willie Walker attached. >>> >>> espeak - a compact open source software speech synthesizer >>> >>> Since espeak is under the LGPL, isn't it "free source" rather than >>> "open source"? >> >> The wording for just about everything came from a combination of the >> eSpeak sourceforge page and the output of running "espeak --help". I >> chose to be as true to the original source as possible and not provide >> our own interpretation or edits. > > In terms of whether the project identifies itself as a free or open > source project, I agree. However, in terms of style guide issues, we > probably should modify our manpages to reasonably conform to the style > guide. > >> eSpeak is also GPLv3, not LGPL. > > How did this pass OSR, then? I thought Sun wasn't allowing GPLv3 > components into Solaris yet. I can't believe we didn't catch this > before now. I don't believe we can integrate this into Nevada until we > find out, for sure, if we can deliver GPLv3. > > At any rate, all the paperwork is ready to allow its integration, once > we get an answer from SunLegal about GPLv3. > >>> The project website seems to refer to itself as "eSpeak". Shouldn't we >>> also? >>> >>> http://espeak.sourceforge.net/ >> >> Well...the command is espeak, not eSpeak. So, the question is whether >> the particular use of "espeak" is referring to the project or the >> command. I'm fine with however you want to spell >> eSpeak/espeak/ESpeak/etc. in the various contexts in the man page - if >> you suggest spellings, I won't debate you and we'll all be happy. > > I think when referring to the project, "eSpeak" i sprobably better, and > when referring to the command "espeak" makes more sense. That said, I > think "espeak" is probably right for all the usages in the manpages. > >>> The DESCRIPTION section says this: >>> >>> Additional information is also available from the fol- >>> lowing site: >>> >>> http://espeak.sourceforge.net/ >>> >>> However, this information is normally put in the "SEE ALSO" section. >>> Refer to other manpages which refer to website project links. The >>> libespeak manpage has a similar issue. >> >> Fine by me. We definitely don't want to confuse people by putting it >> in the wrong spot. > > It's not a big deal, I'm just trying to help inform you about Sun > styleguide for manpages. I moved it in both manpages. > >>> The description of the -f option makes no sense to me, at least not >>> after the "If neither...". >>> >>> -f text file Speak text from text file. If nei- >>> ther -f nor --stdin, words are spo- >>> ken, or if none then text is spoken >>> from stdin, each line separately. >> >> I think just trimming it to "Speak text from text file" should be >> sufficient to prevent confusion. > > Fixed. > >>> -v voice name Use voice file of this name from >>> espeak-data/voices. >>> >>> You don't mention espeak-data/voices in the FILES section below. >>> If it is a useful interface, it should be descirbed there also. >> >> As above, trimming this to "Use voice name" is probably fine. > > Fixed. > > Brian >
