Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Apr  8 16:44, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:34:21PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
> > > He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.
> > 
> > Thanks, Barry.
> > 
> > A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal
> > office does not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.
> 
> I'm not sure what *the* Public Domain Notice is, but I don't know of any
> public domain "licence" or declaration which isn't compatible with the
> GNU GPL.  The FSF seems to agree:
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain
> 
> If you provide a patch with a disclaimer that you are putting the patch
> in the public domain, I would expect Corinna/cgf/Red Hat would be able
> to incorporate it into the project.  They can then distribute it under
> the GPL without you needing to do any of the copyright assignment or
> distributing anything under the GPL yourself.

Right, as long as it falls under the trivial patch rule.  We usually
draw the line at about 10 lines of changes.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: pgpoZmi7cTiX5.pgp
Description: PGP signature