On Saturday, 4 August 2007 00:46, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > On 8/4/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hmm... You can help you know... > > > > Perhaps I'm doing something else, which I consider as more important, in > > parallel? > > We can always complete this in future. > Also if you apply the suggested fix, you can add more info later, > there is nothing wrong with the current information. > Anyway, it improves current state.
No, it doesn't. Actually, it is confusing, because copyright is not the same thing as a license. If you refer to licenses and then only provide the copyright information, that is plain _wrong_ and makes things worse than they are right now. > > > I did not had to do this for autoconf/automake migration. > > > It should have already be available. > > > > > > OK... Forget licensing... Just rename LICENSE to COPYING. > > > > Which is necessary, because? > > It is not NECESSARY, this is the convention used by autoconf packages. > And since it does not cost anything to meet conventions, I think it > should be done. OK, I'll do that, then. Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Suspend-devel mailing list Suspend-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/suspend-devel
