Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:23:15 -0700 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: emacs-22.0.99_1 Message-ID: <6974433C-F505-4EFC-A00B-C7E54B0AC395@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20070821092144.GC2000@kobe.laptop> References: <b2807d040708191436g38186ce6l73a7bb46bd42800b@mail.gmail.com> <20070820100203.GA2580@kobe.laptop> <C53FA330-0A95-49F7-A2DD-FBA1DFC81735@mac.com> <20070821092144.GC2000@kobe.laptop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 21, 2007, at 2:21 AM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>> Anyway, did you have a specific concern about GPLv3?
>
> I was mostly concerned about local patches which we have 'backported'
> from CVS trunk of GNU Emacs to the editors/emacs port, to unbreak GTK+
> builds.
>
> Should we sign papers with the FSF to 'distribute' builds of this
> port?
> Do we need to change anything from the way we handled GPLv2
> versions of
> GNU Emacs in the Ports tree? .. and so on.
The FSF probably would like people who *submit* substantial patches
to GNU projects to sign a contributor agreement, but of course one
doesn't have to do so in order to use, modify, or even redistribute
GPLv{2,3}'ed code.
It might be the case that pinging <licensing@fsf.org> would provide
you authoritative feedback from them rather than just my random
opinion.... :-)
--
-Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6974433C-F505-4EFC-A00B-C7E54B0AC395>