Re: [gnu.org #1534539] Re: Licensing issues for gendocs_template_min
Asher Gordon writes: > Ok, I've updated my patch; see below. Whoops, I meant to amend the commit, not create a new one. Here's the full patch: From d6859cd978ed2ff787b062b5094656b3c3608c91 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Asher Gordon Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 13:39:01 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates. * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice and bump Parent-Version. * doc/gendocs_template_min: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice and copy the explanatory comment about the license notice at the bottom from gendocs_template. --- ChangeLog| 9 + doc/gendocs_template | 12 +++- doc/gendocs_template_min | 15 +++ 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 924fb436e..a4473284c 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++ b/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +2020-05-22 Asher Gordon + + gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates. + * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice + and bump Parent-Version. + * doc/gendocs_template_min: Add a GNU All-Permissive license + notice and copy the explanatory comment about the license notice + at the bottom from gendocs_template. + 2020-05-21 Bruno Haible group-member: Relicense under LGPLv2+. diff --git a/doc/gendocs_template b/doc/gendocs_template index bab2d88e4..ee26d331f 100644 --- a/doc/gendocs_template +++ b/doc/gendocs_template @@ -1,5 +1,15 @@ - + + + + %%TITLE%% - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation %%TITLE%% diff --git a/doc/gendocs_template_min b/doc/gendocs_template_min index 7b7318af4..30e476ee6 100644 --- a/doc/gendocs_template_min +++ b/doc/gendocs_template_min @@ -3,6 +3,15 @@ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd;> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang="en"> + + %%TITLE%% - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation @@ -71,6 +80,12 @@ (This page generated by the %%SCRIPTNAME%% script.) + Please send general FSF GNU inquiries to -- 2.26.2 Thanks, Asher -- I hate quotations. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson GPG fingerprint: 38F3 975C D173 4037 B397 8095 D4C9 C4FC 5460 8E68 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gnu.org #1534539] Re: Licensing issues for gendocs_template_min
Karl Berry writes: > Thanks for all your work on this. Happy to help! :-) > Also, I used 2020 for the copyright year. Should that instead be > something like 2007-2020? > > Yes. The lone year "2020" stuff is only for the online web pages. Ah, I see. So should these copyright years be used? $ git blame doc/gendocs_template | perl -pe 's/^.*\s(\d+)-.*$/$1/' | sort -u 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2014 2017 2020 $ git blame doc/gendocs_template_min | perl -pe 's/^.*\s(\d+)-.*$/$1/' | sort -u 2007 2009 2011 2014 2017 2019 2020 Or is it ok to just say 2006-2020 for gendocs_template and 2007-2020 for gendocs_template_min? > Also, I think the Parent-Version: value should be incremented in > gendocs_template. I'm not sure if anyone is still using it, but at one > time there was a semi-automated way to merge changes in the template > into people's per-project index.html files using that. Ok, I've updated my patch; see below. Let me know if the copyright years are acceptable as well. From 813ffbca35b9cf2f8fbaa2c255ccde46548dd68a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Asher Gordon Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 20:05:52 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates. * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice and bump Parent-Version. * doc/gendocs_template_min: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice and copy the explanatory comment about the license notice at the bottom from gendocs_template. --- ChangeLog| 8 +--- doc/gendocs_template | 4 ++-- doc/gendocs_template_min | 2 +- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 602ef42c5..a4473284c 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++ b/ChangeLog @@ -1,9 +1,11 @@ 2020-05-22 Asher Gordon gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates. - * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice. - * doc/gendocs_template_min: Likewise, and also copy the - explanatory comment about the license notice at the bottom. + * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice + and bump Parent-Version. + * doc/gendocs_template_min: Add a GNU All-Permissive license + notice and copy the explanatory comment about the license notice + at the bottom from gendocs_template. 2020-05-21 Bruno Haible diff --git a/doc/gendocs_template b/doc/gendocs_template index 682c38110..ee26d331f 100644 --- a/doc/gendocs_template +++ b/doc/gendocs_template @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ - +
Re: [gnu.org #1534539] Re: Licensing issues for gendocs_template_min
Thanks for all your work on this. Also, I used 2020 for the copyright year. Should that instead be something like 2007-2020? Yes. The lone year "2020" stuff is only for the online web pages. Also, I think the Parent-Version: value should be incremented in gendocs_template. I'm not sure if anyone is still using it, but at one time there was a semi-automated way to merge changes in the template into people's per-project index.html files using that. Apart from that, the change seems fine to me. But can I ask someone else to install it, please? Bruno? I have no faith in my ability to use git in expected ways. Well, I notice you didn't send your message to licensing, Oops, dumb oversight. I changed the subject and then forgot :(. --thanks, karl.
[gnu.org #1534539] Re: Licensing issues for gendocs_template_min
Hi Karl,
Karl Berry writes:
> Asher and all - the CC-BY-ND (or, previously, "verbatim copying is
> allowed") is intended to refer to the web page as posted publicly
> (that's why it's visible text), not the gendocs_* template files
> themselves.
Ah, I see. I guess I didn't look very carefully at the previous license
text, so I assumed it was the All-Permissive. :-P So, if I use the
template, should I change the license notice to my own copyright and
license?
Also, I see now that there is an explanatory comment above the copyright
block in gendocs_template. However, this is not in gendocs_template_min,
so I didn't see it. Perhaps it should be added there as well.
> I suppose there should be commented-out text stating the license of the
> template text, which should be "all permissive" or "public domain". I
> doubt those tiny template files are copyrightable anyway.
According to (maintain) Copyright Notices:
You should maintain a proper copyright notice and a license notice
in each nontrivial file in the package. (Any file more than ten
lines long is nontrivial for this purpose.)
And, as you can see:
$ wc -l gendocs_template{,_min}
91 gendocs_template
93 gendocs_template_min
184 total
> This discrepancy has always existed but no one has brought it up
> before. Anyone can feel free to fix it in gnulib as far as I'm
> concerned.
How's this:
From a78e5e6c1b51da9a8669b14f21cf4e55a71fd924 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Asher Gordon
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 13:39:01 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates.
* doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice.
* doc/gendocs_template_min: Likewise, and also copy the explanatory
comment about the license notice at the bottom.
---
ChangeLog| 7 +++
doc/gendocs_template | 10 ++
doc/gendocs_template_min | 15 +++
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index 924fb436e..602ef42c5 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+2020-05-22 Asher Gordon
+
+ gendocs: Clarify licenses for templates.
+ * doc/gendocs_template: Add a GNU All-Permissive license notice.
+ * doc/gendocs_template_min: Likewise, and also copy the
+ explanatory comment about the license notice at the bottom.
+
2020-05-21 Bruno Haible
group-member: Relicense under LGPLv2+.
diff --git a/doc/gendocs_template b/doc/gendocs_template
index bab2d88e4..682c38110 100644
--- a/doc/gendocs_template
+++ b/doc/gendocs_template
@@ -1,5 +1,15 @@
+
+
+
%%TITLE%% - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
%%TITLE%%
diff --git a/doc/gendocs_template_min b/doc/gendocs_template_min
index 7b7318af4..00bdffe1c 100644
--- a/doc/gendocs_template_min
+++ b/doc/gendocs_template_min
@@ -3,6 +3,15 @@
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd;>
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang="en">
+
+
%%TITLE%% - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
@@ -71,6 +80,12 @@
(This page generated by the %%SCRIPTNAME%%
script.)
+
Please send general FSF GNU inquiries to
--
2.26.2
Also, I used 2020 for the copyright year. Should that instead be
something like 2007-2020?
> You don't need to resend mail to licensing. They can merge multiple
> messages into one ticket if they so choose. It happens all the time.
> It's a deficiency in RT.
Perhaps it would be better to look at the In-Reply-To header instead...
Well, I notice you didn't send your message to licensing, but I'll just
send this one so that they know the issue is (pretty much) resolved.
licens...@fsf.org: As you can see, I believe we have the situation under
control. So you can now close the issue. Sorry for the noise, and I hope
I didn't cause too much trouble!
Thanks,
Asher
--
If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.
GPG fingerprint: 38F3 975C D173 4037 B397 8095 D4C9 C4FC 5460 8E68
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: Add gl_list_remove_last to list/xlist
Hi Bruno,
Am Sa., 2. Mai 2020 um 17:49 Uhr schrieb Bruno Haible :
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> > Okay; I agree that a separate stack or FIFO module can make more
> > sense; in particular when it only has to deal with a single
> > implementation of an underlying data structure. At the moment I do
> > have other work to finish first, but maybe I will find some time in
> > the near future for a stack module.
Alternatively, one could implement a universally usable stack through
the following header file (mimicking somewhat C++ templates). What do
you think? It will be a lot faster than using the general list modules
of Gnulib.
It would be used like:
STACK (int) stack;
STACK_INIT (stack);
assert (STACK_EMPTY (stack));
STACK_PUSH (stack, 4)
assert (!STACK_EMPTY (stack));
assert (STACK_TOP (stack) == 4);
assert (STACK_POP (stack) == 4);
assert (STACK_EMPTY (stack));
STACK_CLEAR (stack);
So long,
Marc
#ifndef _GL_STACK_H
#define _GL_STACK_H
#include
#include
#include
#define STACK(type)\
struct {\
type *base;\
size_t size;\
size_t allocated;\
}
#define STACK_INIT(stack)\
do\
{\
(stack).base = NULL;\
(stack).size = 0;\
(stack).allocated = 0;\
}\
while (0)
#define STACK_CLEAR(stack)\
free ((stack).base)
#define STACK_EMPTY(stack)\
((stack).size == 0)
#define STACK_BASE(stack)\
((stack).base)
#define STACK_PUSH(stack, item)\
do\
{\
if ((stack).size == (stack).allocated)\
(stack).base = x2nrealloc ((stack).base, &(stack).allocated,
sizeof (item)); \
(stack).base [(stack).size++] = item;\
}\
while (0)
#define STACK_POP(stack)\
(stack).base [--(stack).size]
#define STACK_DISCARD(stack)\
(--(stack).size)
#define STACK_TOP(stack)\
(stack).base[(stack).size - 1]
#define STACK_SIZE(stack)\
((stack).size)
#endif /* _GL_STACK_H */
Re: Fix memleak in getdelim.m4
Hi Tim,
> Well, all made on the _same_ system (my desktop) with just ~35 minutes
> in between.
>
> Since system updates are made manually, it is _very_ unlikely that I
> made an update between the tests.
:-)
> But yes, I made one test without $CC set (so likely with gcc) and the
> other one with CC=clang and CFLAGS=-fsanitize...
Then it would be useful to have the config.{cache,log,status} results also
for a build where CC=clang but CFLAGS unset. So as to distinguish which
differences come from clang vs. gcc and which come from the sanitizers.
Each of these differences points to a possible problem in our *.m4 macros.
Bruno
Re: Fix memleak in getdelim.m4
Hi Bruno, On 21.05.20 21:31, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Tim, > > These comparisons are not so useful, because they not only come from different > compilers (gcc vs. clang) but also from systems with different libcs: there > are differences regarding libm, calloc, thrd_create, pthread_sigmask, and > other > functions. It would be more useful to compare, on the _same_ system: > - gcc vs. clang, > - clag vs. clang -fsanitize=... Well, all made on the _same_ system (my desktop) with just ~35 minutes in between. Since system updates are made manually, it is _very_ unlikely that I made an update between the tests. But yes, I made one test without $CC set (so likely with gcc) and the other one with CC=clang and CFLAGS=-fsanitize... Regards, Tim signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
