Re: copyright message with(out) directives

On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 12:52:42AM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > So -- how about if we change this text in standards.texi: > > For more information about these matters, > see the files named COPYING. > > into this text instead: > > For more information about these matters, > see

Re: copyright message with(out) directives

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > +the GNU General Public License .\n\ > > I've never seen a url in this message before, for any program. Not that > I object, I guess it makes sense, but it seems new? Yes, it is new. > You said you found this in

Re: copyright message with(out) directives

+the GNU General Public License .\n\ I've never seen a url in this message before, for any program. Not that I object, I guess it makes sense, but it seems new? You said you found this in the coding standards, but I'm not seeing it ... ? Not that it's a

Re: copyright message with(out) directives

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > I recall past discussions about this, but don't know what the current > preference is. I agree with Bruno about the desirability of parameterizing this. > And, another point, I see that cp --version, for example, has somehwat > different wording: I think

Re: [bug-gnulib] copyright message with(out) directives

Karl Berry wrote: > Is it better for translators to use placeholder directives in the > standard copyright message, like this (inherited in GNU Hello): > > printf (_("\ > Copyright (C) %s Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n\ > There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A\n

copyright message with(out) directives

Seeking advice ... Is it better for translators to use placeholder directives in the standard copyright message, like this (inherited in GNU Hello): printf (_("\ Copyright (C) %s Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n\ There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A\n\ PARTICU