Re: Relicensing of modules for libposix branch

2011-05-05 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/05/2011 11:37 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: > Here's the list of modules, list of files in lib/, relevant authors, > agreements so far: > So we're complete with the agreements. I am pushing the license change: > > > 2011-05-05 Bruno Haible > > tzset: Relicense under LGPL. > * mod

Re: Relicensing of modules for libposix branch

2011-05-05 Thread Bruno Haible
Here's the list of modules, list of files in lib/, relevant authors, agreements so far: Modules: acosl asinl atanl cosl expl logl sinl sqrtl tanl isfinite tmpfile fflush futimens nanosleep getgroups tzset - no agreement needed, since no file in lib/ strto

Relicensing of modules for libposix branch: abort

2011-05-04 Thread Reuben Thomas
Bruno has pointed out that I got it wrong again, and that furthermore there is authorship information that I couldn't have deduced from any VCS. So, I give up. Sorry for wasting all your time. -- http://rrt.sc3d.org

Re: Relicensing of modules for libposix branch

2011-05-04 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/04/2011 05:06 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote: > Sorry for the confusion. I shall start a new thread. > > Bruno & Jim, at least, you've both written several replies to earlier > messages which I have little hope of collating in a sane amount of > time, so I'd be most grateful if you could just reply

Re: Relicensing of modules for libposix branch

2011-05-04 Thread Jim Meyering
Reuben Thomas wrote: > Sorry for the confusion. I shall start a new thread. > > Bruno & Jim, at least, you've both written several replies to earlier > messages which I have little hope of collating in a sane amount of > time, so I'd be most grateful if you could just reply once, here. > > On 4 Ma

Relicensing of modules for libposix branch

2011-05-04 Thread Reuben Thomas
Sorry for the confusion. I shall start a new thread. Bruno & Jim, at least, you've both written several replies to earlier messages which I have little hope of collating in a sane amount of time, so I'd be most grateful if you could just reply once, here. On 4 May 2011 10:14, Reuben Thomas wrote