Remove the Language-Team header; Zas is a person, not a team.
Copyright licence was given in email:
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 09:49:16 +0200
From: Mikael Berthe <mikael.berthe@lilotux.net>
To: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@iki.fi>
Cc: Laurent Monin <i18n@norz.org>
Subject: Re: [ELinks] French translation update
Message-ID: <20090602074916.GX5189@lilotux.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:30:50 +0200
From: Mikael Berthe <mikael.berthe@lilotux.net>
To: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [ELinks] French translation update
Message-ID: <20090602083050.GY5189@lilotux.net>
Make it clear that modified versions may also be distributed.
I am the sole copyright holder for these ELinks files
so I can replace the licence like this.
This version of the licence is used in bind-9.5.0-P2.tar.gz.
Wikipedia claims ISC made the change in July 2007 after a request
from the FSF.
Conflicts:
NEWS
configure.in
The following files also conflicted, but they had not been manually
edited in the elinks-0.12 branch after the previous merge, so I just
kept the 0.13.GIT versions:
doc/man/man1/elinks.1.in
doc/man/man5/elinks.conf.5
doc/man/man5/elinkskeys.5
po/fr.po
po/pl.po
It is not necessary: when a rule has multiple commands in it, GNU Make
(which ELinks requires anyway) runs them one at a time, regardless of
the -j option, and skips the remaining commands when one of them
fails, regardless of the -k option. These options take effect at the
level of targets rather than individual commands.
http://elinks.cz/community.html says bugs should be reported
to elinks-users but patches should be sent to elinks-dev.
I guess elinks-users is more appropriate here.
This is so that contrib/mkdist need not delete that explicitly
(although it still does, in order to do the right thing with
a few older versions too).
The file could apparently be removed altogether (see recent
emails on elinks-dev) but a small change like this is less
likely to cause any surprises.
Conflicts:
NEWS (bug 939 was listed twice)
doc/man/man5/elinks.conf.5 (regenerated)
po/fr.po (only in comments and such)
po/pl.po (only in comments and such)
src/protocol/fsp/fsp.c (the relevant changes were already here)
The primary motivation for this change is that the disclaimer now
refers to the author whereas it used to refer to the copyright holder.
The ISC license is the preferred license for new code in OpenBSD.
http://www.openbsd.org/policy.htmlhttp://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/share/misc/license.template?rev=1.2
I am also removing the reference to "the same terms as Perl itself"
because those terms are not being distributed with ELinks. Anyway,
Perl 5 is dual licensed under the Artistic License and the GNU General
Public License (version 1 or later), and the ISC license seems GPL
compatible to me.
