Re: license statements in CVS commit messages
On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:42:37AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: David Dawes wrote: On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 09:05:06AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? Assume that anything attributed to me is covered by the 1.1 licence unless explicitly stated otherwise. You mean anything attributed to you in the existing copyright notice, or in the CHANGELOG file? Everything I do is covered by the 1.1 licence unless I explicitly state otherwise. David ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: license statements in CVS commit messages
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, David Dawes wrote: On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:42:37AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: David Dawes wrote: On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 09:05:06AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? Assume that anything attributed to me is covered by the 1.1 licence unless explicitly stated otherwise. You mean anything attributed to you in the existing copyright notice, or in the CHANGELOG file? Everything I do is covered by the 1.1 licence unless I explicitly state otherwise. For example, I seem to recall your committing changes such as #if defined(SCO325) || defined(SCO) || defined(sco) to #if defined(__SCO__) in response to a Bugzilla report by someone else. Reading your statement above literally, it says that makes any modified code covered by the 1.1 license. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
I wrote the original question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] several days ago, ( http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05901.html ) her response was the now this was a joke right? line. My response Al was private which is why Tom, and anyone else who looked, could not find it. Attributing source correctly seems to be a real problem with you it seems. I guess it's endemic. Georgina ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: license statements in CVS commit messages
David Dawes wrote: On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 09:05:06AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? Assume that anything attributed to me is covered by the 1.1 licence unless explicitly stated otherwise. You mean anything attributed to you in the existing copyright notice, or in the CHANGELOG file? If you mean the latter, I think you're wrong. We should attach the appropriate license to each file it applies to. Having each file carry it's full license(s) is the only way to determine what applies to a particular file, in a project with many contributors and many different licenses. -- Matthieu Herrb smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 03:01:02PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Yep, I must have been kidding myself to believe the XFree86 License web page when it said Refer to each source file for specific licence details If you interpret that to apply to every revision of every file in an active CVS repository, then you are kidding yourself. David ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
georgina o. economou wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? now this was a joke right? you got a great sense of humour there. Yep, I must have been kidding myself to believe the XFree86 License web page when it said Refer to each source file for specific licence details or that it would continue under the each file lists the license covering it policy that X and most other multi-license open source projects have always used. But then I suppose since I help people produce copycat garbage, you would say I have no place even looking at XFree86 anymore. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 03:01:02PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: georgina o. economou wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? now this was a joke right? you got a great sense of humour there. Some of the quoting appears to be lost in this (Coopersmith's question, and - I don't see it in my email - Economou's apparent followup). Yep, I must have been kidding myself to believe the XFree86 License web page when it said Refer to each source file for specific licence details or that it would continue under the each file lists the license covering it policy that X and most other multi-license open source projects have always used. I'm playing by those rules. But then I suppose since I help people produce copycat garbage, you would say I have no place even looking at XFree86 anymore. hmm - who are you quoting? -- Thomas E. Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
Thomas Dickey wrote: On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 03:01:02PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: georgina o. economou wrote: I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? now this was a joke right? you got a great sense of humour there. Some of the quoting appears to be lost in this (Coopersmith's question, and - I don't see it in my email - Economou's apparent followup). Ms. Economou's mail client appears to be unable to quote properly. I wrote the original question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] several days ago, ( http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05901.html ) her response was the now this was a joke right? line. Yep, I must have been kidding myself to believe the XFree86 License web page when it said Refer to each source file for specific licence details or that it would continue under the each file lists the license covering it policy that X and most other multi-license open source projects have always used. I'm playing by those rules. David Dawes has indicated he is not - to determine the license of a file you also need to check all the CVS commits to see if a license was stated or if it was attributed to him (in which case, we are told to assume the XFree86 1.1 license). http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05906.html But then I suppose since I help people produce copycat garbage, you would say I have no place even looking at XFree86 anymore. hmm - who are you quoting? That would be Ms. Economou's description of X.Org today on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list: http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2004-April/004400.html (Of course, it is quite ironic considering XFree86 started out by copying the original X Consortium release and modifying it, which would seem to qualify it as copycat garbage as well if you follow Ms. Economou's views on this subject - fortunately, I don't think many people do.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: FW: license statements in CVS commit messages
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Ms. Economou's mail client appears to be unable to quote properly. Probably should upgrade (at least to pine ;-) I wrote the original question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] several days ago, ( http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05901.html ) her response was the now this was a joke right? line. So I see (I've been rather busy this week, and looking down into forum wasn't my first thought). David Dawes has indicated he is not - to determine the license of a file you also need to check all the CVS commits to see if a license was stated or if it was attributed to him (in which case, we are told to assume the XFree86 1.1 license). http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05906.html I did read that (and of course a lot more from various sources). That would be Ms. Economou's description of X.Org today on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list: http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2004-April/004400.html (Of course, it is quite ironic considering XFree86 started out by copying the original X Consortium release and modifying it, which would seem to qualify it as copycat garbage as well if you follow Ms. Economou's views on this subject - fortunately, I don't think many people do.) Certainly. One of the X.org supporters this afternoon posted a comment stating that XFree86 has always shipped X.org's version of xterm. It's not clear to me whether the people who make comments such as that are a majority (too often it does seem so - but it would be nice if the discussion on forum didn't remind me too much of slashdot). (works both ways). -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
license statements in CVS commit messages
I notice many of the affected files do not bear the license notice mentioned in the checkin notice. Is that intentional? Will everyone investigating the license that applies to a file now have to check every CVS commit log entry for that file as well as the file itself to find out which license applies? -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering David Dawes wrote: CVSROOT:/home/x-cvs Module name:xc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/17 23:07:14 Log message: A second invocation of 'make' shouldn't change anything. -- These changes are Copyright (c) 2004 The XFree86 Project, Inc Rights as per version 1.1 of the XFree86 License (http://www.xfree86.org/legal/licenses.html). Modified files: xc/config/cf/: Imake.rules OpenBSDLib.rules X11.tmpl bsdLib.rules lnxLib.rules xc/fonts/scaled/Type1/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/GL/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/apple/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/dri/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/dri/drm/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/glx/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/OSmesa/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/SPARC/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/X/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/X86/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/array_cache/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/common/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/ffb/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/gamma/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/i810/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/i830/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/mga/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/r128/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/r200/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/radeon/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/sis/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/tdfx/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/math/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/swrast/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/swrast_setup/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/tnl/: Imakefile xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/tnl_dd/: Imakefile xc/lib/font/FreeType/module/: Imakefile xc/lib/font/Speedo/module/: Imakefile xc/lib/font/Type1/module/: Imakefile xc/lib/font/X-TrueType/module/: Imakefile xc/lib/font/bitmap/module/: Imakefile xc/nls/: Imakefile xc/nls/Compose/: Imakefile xc/nls/XI18N_OBJS/: Imakefile xc/nls/XLC_LOCALE/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/GL/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/GL/dri/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/GL/glx/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/GL/mesa/GLcore/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/GL/mesa/GLcore/module/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/XTrap/module/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/Xext/extmod/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/afb/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/cfb/: Imakefile.inc xc/programs/Xserver/dbe/module/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/fb/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/ddc/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/apm/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/ark/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/ati/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/chips/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/cirrus/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/cyrix/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/dummy/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/fbdev/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/glide/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/glint/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i128/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i740/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/imstt/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/mga/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/neomagic/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/newport/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/nsc/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/nv/: Imakefile xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/rendition/: Imakefile
