[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug-inetutils] Re: inetutils ChangeLog doc/Makefile.am doc/inetuti...

From: Simon Josefsson
Subject: [bug-inetutils] Re: inetutils ChangeLog doc/Makefile.am doc/inetuti...
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 07:41:31 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.93 (gnu/linux)

address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:

>     doc/fdl.texi is removed below
> If I'm understanding correctly, removing fdl.texi seems wrong to me.
> I'm supposing it's created dynamically from a copy in gnulib or
> somewhere now?


> But the license can't be updated merely by changing that file.  The
> @copying block has to be updated also.  In fact, the @copying block
> now says 1.2, but (I'm guessing) fdl.texi v1.3 is what gets pulled in.


> I think the right outcome is:
> 1) change 1.2 to 1.3 in @copying in inetutils.texi.


> 2) keep a copy of fdl[-1.3].texi in the repo.

I've changed so that fdl-1.3 is imported from gnulib instead of fdl,
which just tracks the latest version (which is wrong).

> 3) in the event that the fdl is updated, both things need to be updated.
>    I don't know of any plausible way to automate it, and updates are so
>    infrequent, it doesn't seem worth the effort.

With the approach I just committed, inetutils will get automatic updates
of fdl-1.3.texi directly.  Presumably that file will never require any
changes to the license statement blurb in inetutils.texi, so this seems

> If I'm missing some sophisticated arrangement which keeps things in
> sync, just ignore me, and sorry for the noise.

What do you think of the current approach?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]