On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:45:13AM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
> > Please re-read my request. This is not what I asked for.
>
> 'As a separate patch, feel free to add the "this manual is under
> the FDL" as a comment to the top of any relevant files in
> Documentation/.
Graham Percival wrote:
> Please re-read my request. This is not what I asked for.
'As a separate patch, feel free to add the "this manual is under
the FDL" as a comment to the top of any relevant files in
Documentation/.'
I took 'all relevant files' to mean all files in the manual, re-reading
yo
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:41:29AM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
> > As a separate patch, feel free to add the "this manual is under
> > the FDL" as a comment to the top of any relevant files in
> > Documentation/.
>
> I think you'll find a couple of such patches, sent by
Graham Percival wrote:
> As a separate patch, feel free to add the "this manual is under
> the FDL" as a comment to the top of any relevant files in
> Documentation/.
I think you'll find a couple of such patches, sent by me, from a while
back ... :-)
Attached again in combined form, hope it's OK.
Cheers, y'all! (figured I should totally abuse trans-atlantic slang)
If anybody wants to dig into copyright info, could they figure out
the first year that each manual appeared? Dump the correct info
into the
@macro copyrightDeclare
in the relevant files in Documentation/.
As a separate patch, f
