From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from re-prd-fep-044.btinternet.com (mailomta5-re.btinternet.com [213.120.69.98]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAA083858D28 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 22:00:09 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DAA083858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dronecode.org.uk Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=dronecode.org.uk Received: from re-prd-rgout-001.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net ([10.2.54.4]) by re-prd-fep-044.btinternet.com with ESMTP id <20230220220008.FCWE11053.re-prd-fep-044.btinternet.com@re-prd-rgout-001.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net>; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 22:00:08 +0000 Authentication-Results: btinternet.com; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jonturney@btinternet.com; bimi=skipped X-SNCR-Rigid: 613A8CC34F4CB25C X-Originating-IP: [81.153.98.246] X-OWM-Source-IP: 81.153.98.246 (GB) X-OWM-Env-Sender: jonturney@btinternet.com X-VadeSecure-score: verdict=clean score=0/300, class=clean X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudejhedgudeglecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemuceutffkvffkuffjvffgnffgvefqofdpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedtudenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepkfffgggfuffvfhfhjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomheplfhonhcuvfhurhhnvgihuceojhhonhdrthhurhhnvgihsegurhhonhgvtghouggvrdhorhhgrdhukheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepkeeukeeuuedukefhfeeufedtjeejfeejhfdtffdttdevvdelheegvdfftdegiedtnecuffhomhgrihhnpegthihgfihinhdrtghomhenucfkphepkedurdduheefrdelkedrvdegieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhephhgvlhhopegludelvddrudeikedruddruddtiegnpdhinhgvthepkedurdduheefrdelkedrvdegiedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehjohhnrdhtuhhrnhgvhiesughrohhnvggtohguvgdrohhrghdruhhkpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedvpdhrtghpthhtohepuehrihgrnhdrkfhnghhlihhssefuhhgrfidrtggrpdhrtghpthhtoheptgihghifihhnqdhprghttghhvghssegthihgfihinhdrtghomh X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean Received: from [192.168.1.106] (81.153.98.246) by re-prd-rgout-001.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net (5.8.716.04) (authenticated as jonturney@btinternet.com) id 613A8CC34F4CB25C; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 22:00:08 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 22:00:07 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 Subject: Re: Copyright outdated? in Cygwin/X FAQ 12.6 and not addressed in Cygwin FAQ 7.1 link Content-Language: en-GB To: Brian Inglis , Cygwin Patches References: <6b01a995-96e5-7b46-3323-1cf348d25252@Shaw.ca> From: Jon Turney In-Reply-To: <6b01a995-96e5-7b46-3323-1cf348d25252@Shaw.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1191.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_SPF_HELO,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 20/02/2023 20:20, Brian Inglis wrote: > Hi folks, > [Addressing to patches as that's where we'll fix it, and not a general > issue.] > > Noticed that: > > https://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html#q-copyright-cygwin > > "12.6. Who holds the copyright on the Cygwin source code? > > Red Hat owns the copyright on the Cygwin source code. Red Hat requires > that copyright be assigned to Red Hat for non-trivial changes to Cygwin. > You must fill out a copyright transfer form if you are going to > contribute substantial changes to Cygwin." > > Has that not been assigned to the project? > > And also: > > https://cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#faq.what.copyright > > "7.1. What are the copyrights? > 7.1. > What are the copyrights? > Please see https://cygwin.com/licensing.html for more information about > Cygwin copyright and licensing." > > -> > > "Cygwin™ Linking Exception > As a special exception, the copyright holders of the Cygwin library" > > Is that the project? > > Or does it belong to the authors individually and/or the project or the > "Cygwin authors" collectively? > > Could we please be as current and explicit as possible in the FAQs once > current situation is clear and wording is agreed? > > Thinking that Cygwin/X FAQ 12.6 should defer to Cygwin FAQ 7.1. Yes. 12.3 and 12.6 should just be links to places where correct information can be found. > Willing to submit FAQ patches ;^> Please do so. Note that the source for this FAQ is docbook in [1] [1] https://cygwin.com/git/cygwin-apps/xorg-doc.git