From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8985 invoked by alias); 2 May 2011 11:48:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 29128 Received: (qmail 8750 invoked from network); 2 May 2011 11:48:23 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at ntlworld.com designates 81.103.221.47 as permitted sender) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:48:10 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add openSUSE specific command completions Message-ID: <20110502124810.332a421d@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20110430175956.675b969a@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=R50lirqlHffDPPkwUlkuVa99MrvKdVWo//yz83qex8g= c=1 sm=0 a=-2-psZLHuMkA:10 a=uObrxnre4hsA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=YQfN4TnuAAAA:8 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=aVz_TDtIj88hfwbOKWAA:9 a=vwRcBLvdBbFh8VCr5B0A:7 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=bxnOgZBHIjQA:10 a=_dQi-Dcv4p4A:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 On Sun, 1 May 2011 20:40:07 -0400 (EDT) "Benjamin R. Haskell" wrote: > On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Peter Stephenson wrote: >=20 > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:49:43 +0200 =C4=B0smail D=C3=B6nmez wrote: > >> These completions were getting rot in openSUSE zsh package. It would=20 > >> be nice to get them included upstream. > > > > Thanks, just got back from holiday, skipped with glazed eyes over=20 > > zillions of emails but noticed this and committed it. >=20 > I noticed that a couple of those (_osc and _zypper) had copyright=20 > notices in the files (which didn't seem to match the submitter), and=20 > that they were "released under the GPLv2." >=20 > Are those okay to include without Zsh itself being GPL'ed? I see the=20 > LICENCE file states that "any provisions made in individual files take=20 > precedence." That makes it fine? I'm not aware of it being a problem in shell functions, at least. Typically it's after compilation where we need to be particularly careful. We already have GNU functions for configuration etc., although that's a special case. --=20 Peter Stephenson Web page now at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/p.w.stephenson/