-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Paul Eggert on 7/13/2007 12:41 PM: > > Going back to using copies (instead of symbolic links) when > bootstrapping would not merely be a minor annoyance for me; it would > be a real hassle and would make the resulting programs less reliable.
Would it still be possible to keep symlink development (yes, that means during development, the linked files bear a looser license than necessary, but only on the developer's machine), so long as a maintainer-check guarantees a fresh gnulib checkout with proper licenses at 'make dist' time (so that the tarball has the correct license)? That way, we could go with the approach of using LGPL (where allowed) in the gnulib files during development, and only convert to GPL at distribution time of a client package. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGl9PJ84KuGfSFAYARAnyNAJ9M5TJgMZNPQFDnUXAOJU8ivrjP1wCePlWf 00lC5IfL8ULeooaz98uT7jU= =p5Uf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
