Follow-up Comment #15, task #15348 (project administration):

Thanks for the reply.

> What actually matters is whether the maintainers of the package basically
understand where these parts of copyright notices come from, and whether they
have a commitment to maintain the notices.

Actually I'm paying great attention to the notices, thanks to what I've
learned from people like you. But README and the example files do not
constitute the main part of this project. It's very unlikely that one day we
face a dispute over who their exact copyright holders are (even if that
happens the records in the git repository will settle that). I won't insist on
using the phrase "The authors of FMD" in the notices of those files, but it
would look awkward if, for example, the names of 10 people are listed in a
short readme file because each of them added one paragraph or so. Please
inform me of your final judgment about the usage of the phrase "The authors of
FMD" in the mentioned files. I'll prepare the files according to that.

Two final remarks:
1. Despite my really great respect and debt to people who have worked on GNU,
I don't like the term GNU/Linux. I'm going to use phrases like "Operating
Systems with Linux kernel" or, more generally, "Unix-like systems" instead.
2. We may have more than one host for this project (2 hosts are enough). I
hope this isn't against your rules. The git repositories on all hosts will
always be up-to-date.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via Savannah

Reply via email to