Karl Berry writes: > > 1) Because there are (small) bugs in version 1. That's why there was a > version 2, after all.
Do you know what they are? I've looked at gnu.org, but I can't find any summary of the changes from version 1 to version 2 or any rationale for the revisions. And there are enough minor wording changes to make diff pretty ineffective. > 2) So that the cvs copyrights have a better chance of standing up in > court if they are challenged. That's the whole point of having > copyrights and licenses. It looks to me like the existing copyright notices do follow the suggestions. In what way do you think they're defective? -Larry Jones I think my cerebellum just fused. -- Calvin _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
