[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #26, task #14414 (project administration): the updated tarball of the svndump: http://ftp.gnustep.org/pub/gnustep/contrib/gnustep-nonfsf-2017-07-14.dump.gz ___ Reply to this item at:

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #24, task #14414 (project administration): GNA died and there were no backups - we didn't work it out in time, this introduced some delays. I hope I have restored the repository without loosing changes. We removed the "Face" code. Tracking a current email address of the original

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #22, task #14414 (project administration): let me skip for now to the other thing you mentioned: >Bundles/Face/Face.h has a confusing statement: >// This code has been created by Carl Edman >// (C) Copyright 1995, but otherwise this file is perfect freeware. > >Could you clari

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #20, task #14414 (project administration): >Are you saying they are not parts of your source code? Then why not remove them? They are interface description files, they are necessary for the application to run. What I mean is that the containing directory should not have extra fi

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #18, task #14414 (project administration): > It looks like Documentation/IMAGES_README has a few typos, these files are missing: Indeed there were some case-issues, typos and other minor things that I amended. I made all licenses explicit too. > Files like Bundles/Compose/Engl

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #16, task #14414 (project administration): Discussing if and how a Copyright can be split on several lines is sterile. I think I am right, since it can be split on more lines, without explicitly requiring that each line is a valid copyright. Discussing a "copyright grammar" here

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #14, task #14414 (project administration): Hi all, All addresses are now fixed: either by replacing the address or by using the URL reference. I grepped through all files, source files, Makefiles, READMEs. What would be invalid in that copyright line? Even the guide you cite sta

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Additional Item Attachment, task #14414 (project administration): File name: GNUMail-6.tar.gz Size:1401 KB ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #11, task #14414 (project administration): Thanks - I checked your feedback. I did not attach the wrong wile, but I unfortunately missed a lot of files, Mac and GNUstep builds use a different subset files in their projects, but of course we need them all 1) I amended the copyri

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Additional Item Attachment, task #14414 (project administration): File name: GNUMail_5.tar.gz Size:1402 KB ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Additional Item Attachment, task #14414 (project administration): File name: GNUMail-4.tar.gz Size:1387 KB ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14414] Submission of GNUstep Non-FSF

Follow-up Comment #9, task #14414 (project administration): I went through all copyright notices of all source files, they had the same issues as the Readme file. I amended that. Furthermore, the copyright and license attribution of the icon was wrong. I fixed that. However, let's be reasonable: