Re: DEP5: copyright statement form, etc

Dear Lars and everybody, here are two answers and a proposition for editorial changes. > * Should we suggest people keep the upstream copyright statements > verbatim, including the word "Copyright" or c-in-a-circle or whatever? Given that the upstream authors are somtimes themselves inconsisten

kredit tanpa agunan scb solusi keuangan anda

Personal loan atau kredit tanpa agunan dari standard chartered bank memberikan pinjaman hingga Rp.150.000.000 , bunga hingga 1,50 % / bulan.Proses yang mudah dan cepat 7- 10 hari kerja dengan kepastian approval yg tinggi DATA YG DIBUTUHKAN UNTUK PENGAJUAN 1 BUNGA 1,50 %: 1.Foto copy KTP

DEP5: Extra fields without ‘ X-’ prefix?

Le Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 08:12:15PM +, Lars Wirzenius a écrit : > > The editorial changes, plus these two items, are the final things left > for DEP5, except for the review for licenses, shortnames and SPDX > compatibility. Hi Lars, I would like to discuss about the addition of ‘X-’ in front

Re: DEP5: copyright statement form, etc

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:12:15 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > * Should we suggest people keep the upstream copyright statements > verbatim, including the word "Copyright" or c-in-a-circle or whatever? > Or should we suggest that they can also shorten them to, say, "2010, J. > Random Hacker"? I'm fin

Re: What is annoying in the flattr buttons?

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 09:28, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Michael Gilbert > > Hi, > > | On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:27:08 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > | > | > You don't think so.  I do.  One of the reasons is it puts a, IMO too > | > low value on other, similar work, so by taking petty donations fo

DEP5: copyright statement form, etc

A couple more points about DEP5: * Should we suggest people keep the upstream copyright statements verbatim, including the word "Copyright" or c-in-a-circle or whatever? Or should we suggest that they can also shorten them to, say, "2010, J. Random Hacker"? I'm fine with either. Currently the exam

DEP5: editorial changes

I would like to propose the attached patch, which makes some editorial changes to the DEP5 draft. It was bugging me that the document structure was so deep (four levels of sections in some places), and details of Files were in two places, and so on. So I re-arranged things a bit more to my liking,

Re: DEP-5: clarify batching of copyrights, licenses in a single stanza

On to, 2010-10-28 at 17:52 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Craig Small writes: > > > This is the collecting part I hope is cleared up. Do something like > > grep -i copyright `find . -name '*.[ch]'` > > over a non trivial project, especially one that has been around for > > years and you get all so