On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 09:36:54AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Also I added Olafs explanations in the wiki-weblog section - I hope that's ok > (if not, we can just remove the commits - or refactor them).
What you could have done (attention: more Git magic forthcoming) when committing 958bd5447e717d80bc14d4ca7257a55d6638bcc9 is to tell Git who the original author was: git commit --author="...". But no big deal, as that's obvious from the commit message as well. > http://www.bddebian.com:8888/~hurd-web/community/weblogs/antrik/hurd-mission- > statement/ You didn't add the copyright and license boilerplate on that page. Intentionally or just forgotten? In general, not neccessarily Hurd-specific, is there consensus ``in the Net'' and amongst lawyers on what the copyright and licensing conditions are with respect to putting texts by individuals that appears on projects' mailing lists or other forums, for example, email or IRC messages, into official web pages or documentation? I'm perfectly fine with my (Hurd related) texts being used with Copyright FSF and whatever documentation license we are using at the moment. Is this OK for others as well, or do I have to ask everytime I transfer or use texts this way? Regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
