Re: Goops, set! and define-syntax throuble

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:

> Mikael Djurfeldt <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > (A little weird though: This requirement would make practical work
> > very difficult if we would follow it throughout.  Which is the
> > essential difference between me modifying psyntax.ss (which, BTW,
> > wasn't originally covered by the GPL) and any guile developer doing
> > the daily change of some piece of Guile code?
> 
> Hmm, maybe that the Guile code is copyright FSF and the FSF is not
> bound by the license on its code?

Hmm... I'm totally lost when it comes to these things.  Today, I put
the FSF copyright on my modified version of psyntax.ss.  I assume that
is OK, given the original copyright in that file.

If what you're saying is true, there is no need to continue adding
dates at the top of that file when we make modifications.  However, of
course I should have put a notice telling users that it's modified,
from the start...