Hi,
Le 25/05/2017 à 14:48, Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel-list a écrit :
Thanks Michael, looks interesting and seems there are enough reasons to
upgrade files too.
We can take a look after we "assume" the project license is gpl3+ and no
problem arises.
in any case, if you choose to change e
Ah thanks Luis, I'll take that into account
Sent from ProtonMail mobile
Original Message
On 28 May 2017, 13:01, Luis Menina wrote:
Hi,
Le 25/05/2017 à 14:48, Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel-list a écrit :
> Thanks Michael, looks interesting and seems there are enough reasons t
Hey Felipe,
What is that you are no fan of in the merge request workflow? Would a command
line application thay works similarly to git bz fox these issues?
Regarding useless forks, why is that a problem? (Definitely something to take
care on our infra though if it grows too big)
Cheers
--
On Thu, 2017-05-25 at 12:08 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 05:59:02AM -0400, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > For now we won't relicense the files, since that would require
> > copyright holders to agree (iiuc). Instead is the project that will
> > become GPL3+, since the combina
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 03:20:49PM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-25 at 12:08 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> > For LGPL -> GPL, you need the explicit approval of all copyright
> > holders.
>
> No, you don't. It says right in the license that you can use LGPL
> sources as GPL if y
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:21:55PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 01:49:21PM +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> > By attaching a patch to a bugtracker ticket, we loose the information of
> > the parent commit: where the commit has been initially created in the
> >
