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

2010-02-23 Thread Carl Worth
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:42:30 -0800, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Please drop the above the next time. Oops. Yes, I missed that. 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. Fair enough.

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

2010-02-23 Thread Matthieu Moy
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.notmuch.general/1389/focus=140156 [...] Meanwhile, a message ID lives forever and can be used in multiple contexts. Oh, I never said do not use message ID. I said message ID alone is not good enough for most

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

2010-02-22 Thread Carl Worth
From 8693995fde71e8b028318e1e83bdbb6ae759335a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:41:24 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] test-lib.sh: Add explicit license detail, with change from GPLv2 to GPLv2+. This file has had no explicit license information noted in

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

2010-02-22 Thread Tay Ray Chuan
Hi, On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com 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 analysis, blame alone is not sufficient - it does not