RRI - copyright assignment mailed in

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi Jim, Paul, Paolo, anyone else I missed,

I sent in paperwork for copyright assignments in grep and gnulib to the
FSF; they were mailed last Friday so they should be there by now.

Can we move ahead getting the Rational Range Interpretation patches
integrated?

I expect that they would drop in easily.

Thanks,

Arnold

[Paolo Bonzini-2]

Il 26/04/2012 22:40, Aharon Robbins ha scritto:
> Hi Jim, Paul, Paolo, anyone else I missed,
>
> I sent in paperwork for copyright assignments in grep and gnulib to the
> FSF; they were mailed last Friday so they should be there by now.
>
> Can we move ahead getting the Rational Range Interpretation patches
> integrated?
>
> I expect that they would drop in easily.

Can you please send pointers to the latest version?

I will once more write down my requirements for the patches to go in:

1) For regex, the patches should only touch !_LIBC sections of the code,
so that they can be included in glibc too from the beginning;

2) Later we can discuss affecting also the _LIBC sections of the code,
including fnmatch.  Until then, the patches should not affect the
autoconf test for --with/without-included-regex.

Paolo

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi Paolo.

> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:39:21 +0200
> From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@...>
> To: Aharon Robbins <arnold@...>
> CC: bug-grep@..., karl@..., bug-gnulib <bug-gnulib@...>
> Subject: Re: RRI - copyright assignment mailed in
>
> Il 26/04/2012 22:40, Aharon Robbins ha scritto:
> > Hi Jim, Paul, Paolo, anyone else I missed,
> >
> > I sent in paperwork for copyright assignments in grep and gnulib to the
> > FSF; they were mailed last Friday so they should be there by now.
> >
> > Can we move ahead getting the Rational Range Interpretation patches
> > integrated?
> >
> > I expect that they would drop in easily.
>
> Can you please send pointers to the latest version?

What I sent to the list a while back should do. If not, I will recreate
the patches but I can't promise they'll 100% follow Jim's standards.

> I will once more write down my requirements for the patches to go in:
>
> 1) For regex, the patches should only touch !_LIBC sections of the code,
> so that they can be included in glibc too from the beginning;

I believe this is the case already.

> 2) Later we can discuss affecting also the _LIBC sections of the code,
> including fnmatch.  Until then, the patches should not affect the
> autoconf test for --with/without-included-regex.

How do I check this?  I am not sure this is a reasonable requirement,
since this patch purposely changes the behavior against glibc.

I will submit the diffs one more time but after that I give up.

As a separate question, there are some bugs in glibc regex that I
have fixed and would like to submit patches for. Can I send them to
you offline?

Thanks,

Arnold

[Paolo Bonzini-2]

Il 27/04/2012 10:47, Aharon Robbins ha scritto:
> What I sent to the list a while back should do. If not, I will recreate
> the patches but I can't promise they'll 100% follow Jim's standards.

Yes, please recreate them.

>> I will once more write down my requirements for the patches to go in:
>>
>> 1) For regex, the patches should only touch !_LIBC sections of the code,
>> so that they can be included in glibc too from the beginning;
>
> I believe this is the case already.

Cool!

>> 2) Later we can discuss affecting also the _LIBC sections of the code,
>> including fnmatch.  Until then, the patches should not affect the
>> autoconf test for --with/without-included-regex.
>
> How do I check this?

Easy, you do not touch *.m4 at all. :)

Of course the behavior for --with and --without-included-regex will be
different.  However, I don't want the *default* choice made by autoconf
to change; not yet, at least.

> As a separate question, there are some bugs in glibc regex that I
> have fixed and would like to submit patches for. Can I send them to
> you offline?

Sure.

Paolo

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi Paolo.

> Il 27/04/2012 10:47, Aharon Robbins ha scritto:
> > What I sent to the list a while back should do. If not, I will recreate
> > the patches but I can't promise they'll 100% follow Jim's standards.
>
> Yes, please recreate them.

Done. Sent.

And I got an official email from the FSF legal elves that my paperwork
was received. :-)

> >> 2) Later we can discuss affecting also the _LIBC sections of the code,
> >> including fnmatch.  Until then, the patches should not affect the
> >> autoconf test for --with/without-included-regex.
> >
> > How do I check this?
>
> Easy, you do not touch *.m4 at all. :)

No problem then. Only C code is touched.

> > As a separate question, there are some bugs in glibc regex that I
> > have fixed and would like to submit patches for. Can I send them to
> > you offline?
>
> Sure.

Great. Next week sometime.  I will factor out RRI changes so that
you get those things that are only for glibc.

Thanks,

Arnold

[Jim Meyering]

Aharon Robbins wrote:
...
> And I got an official email from the FSF legal elves that my paperwork
> was received. :-)

In general, you(as a gnu maintainer) can check copyright
assignment status with a command like like this:

  ssh fencepost.gnu.org grep -i "'gnulib.*robbins'" \~gnuorg/copyright.list