On 18 Aug 2012, at 09:49, Thomas Davie <tom.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 18 Aug 2012, at 08:15, Niels Grewe <invalid.nore...@gnu.org> wrote: > >> Update of bug #37130 (project gnustep): >> >> Item Group: Bug => Change Request >> Assigned to: None => thebeing >> >> _______________________________________________________ >> >> Follow-up Comment #1: >> >> Nice! >> >> Thanks alot for the patch, especially since it removes one item from my todo >> list :-). I have one remark, though: If you want to call blocks in >> gnustep-base, you need to use the CALL_BLOCK macro, which ensures that we can >> compile gnustep-base with GCC and still use blocks properly. >> >> Since this is clearly a substantial patch: Have you signed a copyright >> assignment with the FSF? -- We'd require that before incorporating the patch. > > I have not, and will not, but you can hear-by consider the patch to be BSD 3 > clause licensed to you (and anyone else). If you need to have the code in a > way that's assigned to the FSF, feel free to use it as a basis for your own > patch that you do assign.
Sorry Niels, that may have come across as overly assertive/aggressive. I did not mean that I will not because of some political stance, but instead simply that in this instance I can not. This was done on my company's time, and they have allowed me to license the code out to you in an open way; but the copyright belongs to them, so I can not do more than that. Hope that clarifies my position Thanks Tom davie _______________________________________________ Bug-gnustep mailing list Bug-gnustep@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep