> The following files are not UTF-8, bus US-ASCII encoded:
>
> BUG-REPORT
> FDL
> INSTALL
> INSTALL.REPO
> INSTALL.gen
> MANIFEST
> MORE.STUFF
> PROBLEMS
> PROJECTS
> README
> README.MinGW
Yep. An indication of the encoding makes only sense if there are
actually non-ASCII characters.
> In addition to that, it is widely considered bad style to add
> annotations suitable only for one particular editor to end-user
> visible files.
Here I disagree. In case the encoding is not ASCII, it should be
specified in the file, and using the Emacs way is a good thing, given
that Emacs is a GNU package also. I don't mind to additionally add
vim tags, say.
> Besides, in a new work, copyright is only applicable if the work
> exceeds a threshold of originality[1].
Indeed. Small Makefiles don't need to have a copyright. However,
there are some Makefiles, IIRC, that are non-trivial and lack a
copyright notice.
> [...] Consequently, bumping the list of copyright years in such a
> case is a misrepresentation of the legal situation - unless you
> bumped based on some *other*, indeed copyrightable change, but a
> quick "git log -- FDL" gives me the impression that is not the case.
The FSF thinks differently: The copyright years should be the same in
all files of a package.
Werner
