Jambunathan K <kjambunat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Oh, I thought I had run out on my quota: I do have a patch that I can > > send in, I just don't want to cause headaches (particularly to you) > > down the line. I'll add a Changelog, mark it as a TINYCHANGE and send it in > > - > > is that OK? > > AFAIK, there is fair amount of audit of ChangeLogs that is done when > anything - that includes Org - goes in to Emacs proper. > > Also considering FSF gives primacy to copyright assignment & disclaimer > in *paper format* and the mere existence of support machinery around it > - a copyright clerk etc etc - one needs to take good amount of care to > make sure that the *sum total* (it is sum total right?) of TINYCHANGES > don't add up to no more than palmful. >
That's what I vaguely remembered, and that's why I thought my quota has run out. I think I will *not* be sending the patch after all. Sten, are you up to doing the work? > If one cannot sum up the lines of changes one has submitted one should > err on the conservative side and not submit a patch. > > I wouldn't record this dissent note if Org were a one-off project. It is > part of a much greater project - a project which gives primacy not to > *convenience* but to a certain *principle*. > > If Nick or someone else checks in some change, someone raises a red flag > and questions the copyright (or whatver) the said code will be pulled > out from Emacs inconveniencing a whole bunch of users. More importantly > it will be shameful for Emacs project. > > We may not do great deeds ourselves but we can do our bit to lend a hand > to someone that stands for something. > Not sure I follow completely, but I will continue trying to cajole others to provide the actual patches and limit myself to providing guidance if necessary. Nick