Jim Gifford wrote: > Jeremy Huntwork wrote: >> Greg Schafer wrote: >> >>> the Acknowledgments page will suffice. "... Technical Writer and Architect >>> of the Next Generation 64-bit-enabling Build Method" or similar. >>> >> I'll give you a day or so to decide on the exact wording you prefer, or >> for someone else to offer a suggestion. Then I'll add this in.
> Your violating his license if you don't put it in. Why play these petty > games, you need to include his license and the terms of his license, > since you have fully stated that your borrowed from his work. Jeremy's request is reasonable, Jim. I don't think there was ever any thought of not giving proper attribution to either Greg or CLFS. Please give us a break here. The changes are reasonably large and everything wasn't perfect on the first commit. All this will get sorted out pretty quickly. Personally, I'd really hope that the approach would be something like "Hey guys, you forgot...", or "X really isn't right. It should be..." There is nothing wrong with making mistakes. Please don't suggest unethical personal motivations unless an editor is unresponsive to polite suggestions. I look forward to any contributions you or Greg can make. Together we can make a large step forward. One last note. I see that you still have LFS commit privileges. If you want, I see no problem with you making commits directly. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
