Re: [notmuch] Using test-lib.sh under GPLv3?

2010-02-19 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Michal Sojka wrote: as you can read bellow, I'd like to use git's test-lib.sh in a GPLv3 project. Do you mind if I use your work in that file under GPLv3? I do not mind, but I would like to ask that you contribute the improvements back under GPLv2. Thanks, Johannes

Re: [notmuch] Using test-lib.sh under GPLv3?

2010-02-19 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Carl Worth wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:39:04 +0100 (CET), Johannes Schindelin johannes.schinde...@gmx.de wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Michal Sojka wrote: as you can read bellow, I'd like to use git's test-lib.sh in a GPLv3 project. Do you mind if I use

[notmuch] Using test-lib.sh under GPLv3?

2010-02-19 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Michal Sojka wrote: > as you can read bellow, I'd like to use git's test-lib.sh in a GPLv3 > project. Do you mind if I use your work in that file under GPLv3? I do not mind, but I would like to ask that you contribute the improvements back under GPLv2. Thanks,

[notmuch] Using test-lib.sh under GPLv3?

2010-02-19 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Carl Worth wrote: > On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:39:04 +0100 (CET), Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Michal Sojka wrote: > > > > > as you can read bellow, I'd like to use git's test-lib.sh in a GPLv3 > > > pro

[notmuch] [PATCH] test-lib.sh: Add explicit license detail, with change from GPLv2 to GPLv2+.

2010-02-20 Thread Johannes Schindelin
ick.localdomain> > > and explicitly agreed to by Junio C Hamano, Sverre Rabbelier, Johannes > Schindelin, Pierre Habouzit, and Johannes Sixt. As promised: Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin Ciao, Dscho

[notmuch] [PATCH] test-lib.sh: Add explicit license detail, with change from GPLv2 to GPLv2+.

2010-02-23 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Tay Ray Chuan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Junio C Hamano > wrote: > > FWIW, I only said "_at least_ you need consent from them", and it was > > not meant to be an exhaustive list. ?"blame -C -C -C" may tell you > > more. > > Without substantial