On Sun, Apr 18, 2004 at 01:33:41PM +0200, Michel D�nzer wrote: > On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 04:19, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 07:54, Alan Hourihane wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 01:18:49AM +0200, Michel D�nzer wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 00:00, Alan Hourihane wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I could merge in XFree86 4.3.99.902 which is before the license change > > > > > > > > Are you sure? AFAIK David applied the new license (or at least a > > > > similarly controversial one) to some files before it was publicly > > > > announced. > > > > > > Yes, I'm positive that 4.3.99.902 is unencumbered. > > > > I'm pretty sure the autoconfig work, under the X-Oz license (nearly > > identical to the problematic one), was in at that point. > > Right, that's what I was thinking of.
Mmmm, things hotted up after the 4.3.99.902 release, but your right the file xf86AutoConfig.c does have the new license in that release. So that means dropping back to 4.3.99.901 or just let the individuals merge in DDX changes of their own accord, which may be the simpler approach. Alan. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id70&alloc_id638&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
