Re: Licenses.

Re: Licenses.

[Benjamin Kosnik]

> Is this intentional ?

Nope, sorry. I've fixed this in current sources. Thanks for pointing this 
out.

-benjamin

Re: Licenses.

[Mike Stump]

> Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 00:22:33 +0200
> From: Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org

> The following is the exact wording of the top of the
> libstdc++-assign.txt file that accompanies the (new) libstdc++-v3
> distribution (as included in recent CVS downloads):

Well, that file is not distributed by this group (right?).  Hence,
your question/concern has nothing to do with _this_ list.  There is
another list where this question would be appropriate, but this isn't
it.

If it is in our software, then it would seem to not be relevant
anymore and should be removed.

?

Licenses.

[Toon Moene]

Lectoribus Salutem,

As long as we're discussing licensing issues here anyway, this is an
issue Tobias Schlueter brought to my attention on the G95 mailing list.

The following is the exact wording of the top of the
libstdc++-assign.txt file that accompanies the (new) libstdc++-v3
distribution (as included in recent CVS downloads):

<QUOTE>
The way to assign copyright to Cygnus Solutions is to sign an assignment
contract.  This is what legally makes Cygnus Solutions the copyright
holder so that we can register the copyright on the new version.
I'm assuming that you wrote these changes yourself;
if other people wrote parts, we may need papers from them.
</QUOTE>

Is this intentional ?

-- 
Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)