Follow-up Comment #4, task #10686 (project administration):
Greetings,
I will happily do that. Until then, I just have a few minor comments:
- whilst the GPL header I use is indeed slightly different than the suggested
one, it does include all the information needed: copyright statement and
license information.
If using exactly the suggested header is in fact mandatory, then may I
respectfully wonder why the GNU project would refer to it as a "suggested"
header?
- As explicitely specified in each and every one of them, files that lack a
GPL header are deprecated and to be removed. In fact, I have just pushed the
commit so this is no longer a problem (if ever).
- COPYING and README document *are* present in the tarball. To avoid
cluttering the file tree (as repeatedly explained, and as mentioned in the
only top-level file's header), they are just not placed in the share/doc
directory and not at top-level (which may be more common, but not mandatory).
- Whilst I perfectly understand that any project as large as Savannah is
bound to have its share of bureaucracy, I am not amused when the use of
predefined answers tends to take an unnecessarily offensive turn.
Yours respectfully, V.Villenave.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10686>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
