[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should nXML be included
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Should nXML be included |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:06:38 -0400 |
Copyright headers are not necessarily correct. That's why one needs
the written assignment on file for contributions. If James has an
assignment that only covers his (explicit) contributions to Emacs, he
most certainly can't be held responsible for the accuracy of some
headers in a file he never contributed to Emacs.
He didn't sign a general assignment for Emacs changes. He signed
assignments for a few specific files. They cannot apply to this file.
So we need to contact him and ask for another assignment for this
file.
- Re[2]: Multiple major modes, (continued)
Re: Should nXML be included, Stefan Monnier, 2007/06/12
Re: Should nXML be included, Peter Heslin, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, Leo, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, joakim, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, Peter Heslin, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, David Kastrup, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included, Stefan Monnier, 2007/06/12
- Re: Should nXML be included,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Should nXML be included, Claus, 2007/06/13
- Re: Should nXML be included, Richard Stallman, 2007/06/14
- Re: Should nXML be included, Leo, 2007/06/14
- Re: Should nXML be included, Richard Stallman, 2007/06/15
- Re: Should nXML be included, Eric Hanchrow, 2007/06/14