From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:28:36 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: *** empty log message ***
X-Git-Tag: emacs-pretest-22.0.94~308
X-Git-Url: http://git.eshelyaron.com/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=e496f32feec98c869d31864f5f3d7e2ef98672a4;p=emacs.git

*** empty log message ***
---

diff --git a/admin/notes/copyright b/admin/notes/copyright
index 4726d33bf9c..222eb561766 100644
--- a/admin/notes/copyright
+++ b/admin/notes/copyright
@@ -134,7 +134,8 @@ lisp/net/tramp.el
 
 msdos/is_exec.c, sigaction.c
   - these files are copyright DJ Delorie. Leave the copyrights alone.
-  Leave the Eli Zaretskii copyright in is_exec.c alone.
+  Leave the Eli Zaretskii copyright in is_exec.c alone. See the
+  msdos/README file for the legal history of these files.
 
 src/gmalloc.c
   - contains numerous copyrights from the GNU C library. Leave them alone.
@@ -170,7 +171,8 @@ to be added.
   lisp/term/README (author)?
   etc/BABYL?
   borderline "trivial" cases...?
-Apparently these should (all?) be placed under GPL. (asked for clarification)
+Apparently these should all be placed under GPL, rather than the short
+license we have been using till now.
 
 
 Clarify the legal status of many image files. It's not necessary
@@ -184,8 +186,6 @@ Image files to consider (is there such a thing as a "trivial" image?):
 admin/check-doc-strings
   Author is Martin Buchholz, but no assignment from him on file, and
   rms has no way to reach him.
-[FIXED  admin/make-announcement - no copyright]
-[FIXED  admin/nt/makedist.bat - no copyright]
 etc/ms-kermit - no copyright, but ms-7bkermit has one
 etc/e/eterm-color.ti  - no copyright
   rms: "I think that is not copyrightable under the merger doctrine
@@ -231,11 +231,6 @@ man/back.texi, trampver.texi
   - add standard notices to any decided to be non-trivial.
 
 
-[fix to be installed: msdos/is_exec.c, sigaction.c]
-  - do we need to add COPYING.LIB (because COPYING.DJ refers to it)?
-  can we relicense under the GPL? Do these contradict?
-
-
 oldXMenu/
  - should there be any FSF copyrights at all in here? Some were added
    in 2005, without licence notices. Was this right?
@@ -256,3 +251,4 @@ isc2-2.h, netbsd.h, osf1.h, sol2-3.h, sunos4-0.h, umips.h, usg5-4-2.h
 REMOVED src/unexhp9k800.c
   - we would like to re-add this file if possible. Please let us know
   if you can clarify its legal status.
+  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html