[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 'fdl' vs. 'fdl-1.3': difference and/or redundant?
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: 'fdl' vs. 'fdl-1.3': difference and/or redundant? |
Date: |
Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:38:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-186-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) |
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> okay, that means the URL bug should get fixed, right?
> Patch attached.
This cannot be applied to gnulib. It would need to be applied upstream (maybe
by Karl?).
> > There is now a notice in the module description
> > "Don't use this module! Instead, copy the referenced license file into
> > your version control repository."
> > [...]
>
> That warning is exactly from where I'm coming from ... ;-)
>
> But I thought the discussion was about that each project has to
> have all license files as physical copy in its version control,
> which means it should not copy it at bootstrap time from gnulib
> into the working tree. It should be there after cloning a project.
The current common practice is documented in doc/licenses-texi.texi,
and that's the rationale for the notice.
Bruno