Hi,
As I am testing upcoming 6.0 release build process, one thing that strikes me
is the number of LICENCE.txt files, 166 of them. add the 3 for the copying
COPYING-libscheme.txt, COPYING_LESSER.txt, COPYING.txt makes 169 in total.
Is is really necessary to have the 166 copies of the same
On Feb 20, 2014 10:33 PM, Neil Toronto neil.toro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:52 PM, as...@racket-lang.org wrote:
asumu has updated `master' from 1f27fb7848 to 1c6c0855f7.
http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/1f27fb7848..1c6c0855f7
=[ 103 Commits
At Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:17:26 +0100, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
As I am testing upcoming 6.0 release build process, one thing that strikes me
is the number of LICENCE.txt files, 166 of them. add the 3 for the copying
COPYING-libscheme.txt, COPYING_LESSER.txt, COPYING.txt makes 169 in total.
Is
On Feb 21, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt sa...@cs.indiana.edu wrote:
Since Asumu didn't mention it, the first paper about this is here:
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/oopsla12-tsdthf.pdf
Yeah, but don't read this. We will share a draft paper that looks more
practical if you
For at least third-party packages (though you might want something
trickier for core Racket)...
I'm not a lawyer, but I figured that, for most packages I author, I
probably don't *need* to include the full text of a well-known license
(e.g., LGPLv3). Instead, I give the copyright notice,
That sounds much more sensible than including COPYING.txt and
COPYING_LESSER.txt everywhere. Unless someone tells me that it's a
bad idea, I'll switch packages to refer to LGPL by reference.
At Fri, 21 Feb 2014 11:45:50 -0500, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
For at least third-party packages (though you
On 20/02/14 14:19, Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Sun, 09 Feb 2014 08:35:03 +, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
On 09/02/14 00:03, Matthew Flatt wrote:
There should be many more flags passed to `gcc`, including some -I
flags and some -D flags.
Is something in your environment overriding the CFLAGS
7 matches
Mail list logo
