[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ELPA] New package: xr
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: [ELPA] New package: xr |
Date: |
Sat, 09 Feb 2019 10:03:54 +0200 |
> From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 22:37:15 -0500
>
> > Would it suffice (in addition to a copyright assignment, of course) if
> > the files in GNU ELPA contain this sentence?
>
> > This file is part of GNU Emacs.
>
> > Currently, some do but many don't.
>
> IANAL, but I think that all of the source files in ELPA should have
> the standard license notice, including saying "part of GNU Emacs" --
> if for legal purposes we consider it part of GNU Emacs.
Would doing that in the source file be enough to serve as a legal
statement that the Emacs copyright assignment covers the package? Or
will something else be required?
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, (continued)
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/06
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/06
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/06
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/07
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/07
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Stefan Monnier, 2019/02/07
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/08
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Stephen Berman, 2019/02/08
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/08
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/08
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/09
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/10
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/10
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/10
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/02/10
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/11
- Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Richard Stallman, 2019/02/08
Re: [ELPA] New package: xr, Michael Heerdegen, 2019/02/27