NT icons

NT icons

[Chong Yidong]

According to admin/notes/copyright, the copyright status of the icons
in nt/icons are unknown (aside from emacs.ico, which are by Andrew
Zhilin and have copyright assigned.)  Since these icons are only there
for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
propose to delete them.

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

> According to admin/notes/copyright, the copyright status of the icons
> in nt/icons are unknown (aside from emacs.ico, which are by Andrew
> Zhilin and have copyright assigned.)  Since these icons are only there
> for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
> since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
> propose to delete them.
>   

hand.cur is still used. The checkin comment says "derived from index.pbm 
in lisp/toolbar", so if index.pbm is OK, this should be too.

Re: NT icons

[David Kastrup]

Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:

>> According to admin/notes/copyright, the copyright status of the icons
>> in nt/icons are unknown (aside from emacs.ico, which are by Andrew
>> Zhilin and have copyright assigned.)  Since these icons are only there
>> for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
>> since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
>> propose to delete them.
>>   
>
> hand.cur is still used. The checkin comment says "derived from
> index.pbm in lisp/toolbar", so if index.pbm is OK, this should be too.

"derived from" does not exclude additional creative work.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

David Kastrup wrote:
> "derived from" does not exclude additional creative work.
>   
I derived them. There was no additional creative work, and even if there 
was, I have an assignment on file.

Re: NT icons

[Nick Roberts]

 > > "derived from" does not exclude additional creative work.
 > >   
 > I derived them. There was no additional creative work, and even if there 
 > was, I have an assignment on file.

As copyright appears to be an issue for icons, perhaps we should be careful
to use the word `convert' when there is no additional creative work (if
appropriate).

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    As copyright appears to be an issue for icons, perhaps we should be careful
    to use the word `convert' when there is no additional creative work (if
    appropriate).

Good idea.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    > "derived from" does not exclude additional creative work.
    >   
    I derived them. There was no additional creative work, and even if there 
    was, I have an assignment on file.

Then it is good.

Re: NT icons

[Chong Yidong]

Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:

>> According to admin/notes/copyright, the copyright status of the icons
>> in nt/icons are unknown (aside from emacs.ico, which are by Andrew
>> Zhilin and have copyright assigned.)  Since these icons are only there
>> for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
>> since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
>> propose to delete them.
>
> hand.cur is still used. The checkin comment says "derived from
> index.pbm in lisp/toolbar", so if index.pbm is OK, this should be too.

OK.  How about deleting the others?

  emacs21.ico gnu2a32.ico gnu2a32t.ico gnu2b48.ico gnu2b48t.ico
  gnu3b32.ico gnu3b32t.ico gnu4g48.ico gnu4g48t.ico gnu5w32.ico
  gnu5w32t.ico gnu6w48.ico gnu6w48t.ico gnu7.ico gnu8.ico gnu9.ico
  sink.ico

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

Chong Yidong wrote:
> OK.  How about deleting the others?
>   
Done

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

      Since these icons are only there
    for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
    since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
    propose to delete them.

If nobody figures out their origin in the next few days, please do that.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

>       Since these icons are only there
>     for nostalgia purposes, and are not used by anything in Emacs, and
>     since these copyright issues are blocking the Emacs 22 release, I
>     propose to delete them.
>
> If nobody figures out their origin in the next few days, please do that.

I found this entry in copyright.list:

 EMACS   Robertson G. Davenport  1998-11-16
 Disclaims 1m2 gnu icons (.ico files for NT Emacs).
 rgd@infinet.com, rdavenport@bailey.com

Not clear to me which icons it applies to, and they already got
deleted anyway.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Glenn Morris wrote:

> Not clear to me which icons it applies to, and they already got
> deleted anyway.

On reflection, I'm pretty sure it applies to all the nt/icons/gnu*
files. The relevant ChangeLog entry is:

1999-01-22  Geoff Voelker  <voelker@cs.washington.edu>
   * icons: New directory with Davenport's icons.

With regards to the other deleted icons:

I imagine sink.ico is just a conversion of etc/emacs.icon.

emacs21.ico was only installed in 2005, from Andrew Zhilin.

His icons in etc/images/icons/README were recently described as being
Copyright FSF. How is this possible when he has no assignment in
copyright.list (AFAICS?).

Re: NT icons

[Chong Yidong]

Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:

> emacs21.ico was only installed in 2005, from Andrew Zhilin.
>
> His icons in etc/images/icons/README were recently described as being
> Copyright FSF. How is this possible when he has no assignment in
> copyright.list (AFAICS?).

Maybe copyright.list isn't updated.  From

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg00349.html

  From: Richard M. Stallman
  Subject: Time to install the new icons
  Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:56:27 -0500

  Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
  Would someone like to do that, and ack?

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Chong Yidong wrote:

> Maybe copyright.list isn't updated.  From
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg00349.html
>
>   From: Richard M. Stallman
>   Subject: Time to install the new icons
>   Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:56:27 -0500
>
>   Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.

How odd. I mailed fsf-records to ask if they can explain this.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    Maybe copyright.list isn't updated.  From

    http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg00349.html

      From: Richard M. Stallman
      Subject: Time to install the new icons
      Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:56:27 -0500

      Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
      Would someone like to do that, and ack?

This suggests that there's a discrepancy.  I will ask the clerk
to check this ASAP.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> This suggests that there's a discrepancy.  I will ask the clerk
> to check this ASAP.

I asked fsf-records and they replied that they have the assignment. I
don't know why it isn't in copyright.list.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    I asked fsf-records and they replied that they have the assignment. I
    don't know why it isn't in copyright.list.

I will make sure that copyright.list gets fixed.  Meanwhile, can you
please DTRT based on the fact that we have the papers?

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> I will make sure that copyright.list gets fixed. Meanwhile, can you
> please DTRT based on the fact that we have the papers?

There is nothing to do. Things are already OK in this area.

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

Glenn Morris wrote:
> With regards to the other deleted icons:
>
> I imagine sink.ico is just a conversion of etc/emacs.icon.
>   
> emacs21.ico was only installed in 2005, from Andrew Zhilin.
>   
I beleive this was a rename, to make way for the new emacs.ico (which is 
a conversion of Andrew Zhilin's icons in etc/images/icons).
emacs21.ico is/was a conversion of the classic Gnu head image that used 
to be used on the gnu.org website, perhaps even included with Emacs, 
though I can't find it now. The current gnu.org website seems to use an 
updated version of the Gnu head.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:23:29 +0000
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Cc: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Glenn Morris wrote:
> > With regards to the other deleted icons:
> >
> > I imagine sink.ico is just a conversion of etc/emacs.icon.
> >   
> > emacs21.ico was only installed in 2005, from Andrew Zhilin.
> >   
> I beleive this was a rename, to make way for the new emacs.ico (which is 
> a conversion of Andrew Zhilin's icons in etc/images/icons).

Yes:

    2005-11-26  Eli Zaretskii  <eliz@gnu.org>

	    * emacs21.ico: Renamed from emacs.ico.
	    * emacs.ico: New icons from Andrew Zhilin <andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com>.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:36:38 -0500
> Cc: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Glenn Morris wrote:
> 
> > Not clear to me which icons it applies to, and they already got
> > deleted anyway.
> 
> On reflection, I'm pretty sure it applies to all the nt/icons/gnu*
> files. The relevant ChangeLog entry is:
> 
> 1999-01-22  Geoff Voelker  <voelker@cs.washington.edu>
>    * icons: New directory with Davenport's icons.

That should teach us a lesson not to delete anything without a good
faith effort to prove that it doesn't have valid copyright
assignment.  Richard didn't just start being pedantic about
copyrights; we always checked files' assignments before a major
release.  So I cannot believe we have any old files in the
distribution that we cannot distribute.  We may have lost our memory,
but the files are kosher.

I suggest to undelete those icon files.  People worked on them to make
Emacs better; let's not discourage them by throwing away their work.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    That should teach us a lesson not to delete anything without a good
    faith effort to prove that it doesn't have valid copyright
    assignment.

I agree.  When something looks dubious, we shoulc check the facts
rather than rush to delete it.

Re: NT icons

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     That should teach us a lesson not to delete anything without a
>     good faith effort to prove that it doesn't have valid copyright
>     assignment.  Richard didn't just start being pedantic about
>     copyrights; we always checked files' assignments before a major
>     release.  So I cannot believe we have any old files in the
>     distribution that we cannot distribute.  We may have lost our
>     memory, but the files are kosher.
>
> I agree.  When something looks dubious, we shoulc check the facts
> rather than rush to delete it.

Since the chances of any infringing code showing up is so small, I
suggest leaving the remainder of the copyright audit till after the
Emacs 22 release.  It should not hold the release.

I think that after Alan's C++ misfontification fix comes in, we should
release a final pretest tarball, or even Emacs 22.1 itself.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    Since the chances of any infringing code showing up is so small, I
    suggest leaving the remainder of the copyright audit till after the
    Emacs 22 release.  It should not hold the release.

This issue is very important, and I will do it right.  Most of it is
done already, though, so I'm sure you can wait for the rest.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 02:23:55 -0500
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
>     Since the chances of any infringing code showing up is so small, I
>     suggest leaving the remainder of the copyright audit till after the
>     Emacs 22 release.  It should not hold the release.
> 
> This issue is very important, and I will do it right.  Most of it is
> done already, though, so I'm sure you can wait for the rest.

While I agree that the copyright issue is very important, I can hardly
see the point in delaying the release on behalf of old files that were
introduced before the release of Emacs 21.  The chances of having any
file there for which we don't have copyright assignments is an
absolute nil, because we went through the same painstaking process in
preparation for Emacs 21.1.  All we will find now is files whose
copyright was not documented in READMEs, or whose copyright record was
lost due to renaming or human mistakes, that's all.  This kind of
cleanup can be done in parallel with releasing Emacs 22.1.

Do we have copyright problems with files added after Emacs 21 was
released?  If not, let's not delay the release of Emacs 22.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

We are going to clean up the copyright situation before making a release.

Re: NT icons

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> We are going to clean up the copyright situation before making a release.

In that case, what is the situation for the remaining items?  Can any
of the following items be moved into the "resolved" section of
admin/notes/copyright?  How long will this take?

etc/gnus-logo.eps, gnus-booklet.ps, gnus-refcard.ps
 just to be safe, papers are on the way for the "Gnus logo", even
 though it is very similar to the already-assigned "Emacs logo".

etc/emacs.csh
  does rms want simple license restored for this?

etc/ms-kermit - no copyright, but ms-7bkermit has one

etc/TUTORIAL* (translations)
  switch to GPL (see english TUTORIAL)
  rms: "We can leave the TUTORIAL translations alone until their
  maintainers update them."

lib-src/etags.c - no 'k.* arnold' in copyright.list'
 rms: "That is ok, in principle. I used free code released by Ken
 Arnold as the starting point. However, it may be that we need to get
 and insert whatever his license was for his code."

 under GPL, so OK?

 - 1984 version of ctags, with no copyright, posted to net.sources:
   http://groups.google.com/group/net.sources/msg/a21b6c21be12a98d

lwlib/lwlib-Xaw.c
  copyright Chuck Thompson; but under GPL, so OK?

lwlib/lwlib-Xlw.c, lwlib-Xm.c, lwlib-Xm.h, xlwmenu.c
  copyright lucid and FSF, but under GPL, so OK?
  FSF copyrights were added in 200x, was that right?

lwlib/lwlib-int.h, lwlib.h, lwlib-Xaw.h, lwlib-Xlw.h, lwlib-utils.h
  no copyright. last three trivial?
  suspect these must have been part of the "Lucid Widget Library",
  which is under GPL. Can't find an original version of this to check.

lwlib/Makefile.in
 "some parts" copyright Lucid, no license

lwlib/lwlib-utils.c, lwlib.c
  copyright Lucid, Inc; but under GPL, so OK?

lwlib/xlwmenu.h, xlwmenuP.h
  part of 'Lucid Widget Library', but only FSF copyright (when files
  were first checked into RCS, there were no copyrights). Was it right
  to add FSF copyright?
  should we add a 1992 Lucid copyright?

lwlib/*
  should we:
  1) ensure all files that were originally in the "Lucid Widget
  Library" have 1992 Lucid copyright?
  2) add or remove FSF copyrights to any files we have made non-trivial
  changes to since 1992?

oldXMenu/
 - should there be any FSF copyrights at all in here? Some were added
   in 2005, without licence notices. Was this right?
   Eg don't think copyright.h should have FSF copyright!
   Should add copyright details for X11R1 to the README file. (see
   copyright.h). I suggest we remove copyright.h and add the notices
   directly into the files.

The general issue is, as with some of the Lucid code in lwlib, suppose
file foo.c is Copyright (C) 2000 John Smith, and released under the
GPL. We check it into Emacs CVS and make non-trivial changes to it.
Should we add a FSF copyright or not? Can we add such a notice as soon
as we check it check it in to CVS?

oldXMenu/Makefile.in, Makefile, Imakefile, descrip.mms, insque.c
  - issues described in mail to rms, 2006/12/17.
rms: "I have asked for lawyer's advice about these."

Re: NT icons

[David Kastrup]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> lwlib/lwlib-Xaw.c
>   copyright Chuck Thompson; but under GPL, so OK?

No, we would need an assignment.

> lwlib/*
>   should we:
>   1) ensure all files that were originally in the "Lucid Widget
>   Library" have 1992 Lucid copyright?
>   2) add or remove FSF copyrights to any files we have made non-trivial
>   changes to since 1992?

We have on file in copyright.list

    EMACS	Lucid, Inc.	1992-07-01
    Assigns changes to Emacs.

So it would seem that we have lwlib covered.  Would it be relevant
with regard to the copyrights that Lucid has ceased to exist?
<URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucid_Inc.>

Apparently the Lucid-Emacs related product "Energize" went to Tartan
(now a subsidiary of TI).

It is my guess that we should be fine with tracking the copyright and
ownership situation at the time we got both code and assignment.  But
I certainly am no lawyer.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    We have on file in copyright.list

	EMACS	Lucid, Inc.	1992-07-01
	Assigns changes to Emacs.

    So it would seem that we have lwlib covered.

I don't think that lwlib counts as a change to Emacs.  (I don't think
it was written specifically for Emacs.)  This is why the copyright
notices were not changed from Lucid to FSF.

I asked a lawyer for advice about certain points regarding those files.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    In that case, what is the situation for the remaining items?

I do not know yet.  Pressuring me to answer you now cannot help me
deal with these problems.  Please stop!

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Chong Yidong wrote:

> In that case, what is the situation for the remaining items?

Some unofficial comments from my perspective.

> etc/gnus-logo.eps, gnus-booklet.ps, gnus-refcard.ps
>  just to be safe, papers are on the way for the "Gnus logo", even
>  though it is very similar to the already-assigned "Emacs logo".

I don't imagine this will be a release blocker.

> etc/emacs.csh
>   does rms want simple license restored for this?

now fixed.

> etc/ms-kermit - no copyright, but ms-7bkermit has one

don't know

> etc/TUTORIAL* (translations)
>   switch to GPL (see english TUTORIAL)
>   rms: "We can leave the TUTORIAL translations alone until their
>   maintainers update them."

I don't imagine (?) this will be a release blocker, but translators, if
you are reading this, feel free to fix!

> lib-src/etags.c - no 'k.* arnold' in copyright.list'
[..]
> lwlib/*
[...]
> oldXMenu/

We asked Matt Norwood of the Software Freedom Law Center about these
this weekend. I imagine that when he responds (and he was pretty quick
on other issues) that we will be able to clear these up in short
order.


So I think we can be positive, but that's just my guess.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

     EMACS   Robertson G. Davenport  1998-11-16
     Disclaims 1m2 gnu icons (.ico files for NT Emacs).
     rgd@infinet.com, rdavenport@bailey.com

    Not clear to me which icons it applies to, and they already got
    deleted anyway.

We can tell which icons this applies to either (1) by asking him or
(2) seeing which icons were installed shortly after that time.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> We can tell which icons this applies to either (1) by asking him or
> (2) seeing which icons were installed shortly after that time.

>From looking at Rob Davenport's webpage:

<http://users.adelphia.net/~rob.davenport/gnuicons.html>

I'm sure the 15 gnu*.ico files are his, so I restored them.

I can't find any info for sink.ico (which is a bit different from
etc/emacs.icon I think), except (emacs.ico was renamed to sink.ico):

  1996-01-03  George V. Reilly  <georger@microcrafts.com>

      * emacs.ico: Now the proverbial kitchen sink icon.

I can't find any info about emacs21.ico, which is annoying, because I
know I used to see it (and a colour version?) a lot not too long ago.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Glenn Morris wrote:

> I can't find any info about emacs21.ico, which is annoying, because I
> know I used to see it (and a colour version?) a lot not too long ago.

Oh, it's a version of etc/gnu.xpm, which already got deleted.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:28:11 -0500
> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Glenn Morris wrote:
> 
> > I can't find any info about emacs21.ico, which is annoying, because I
> > know I used to see it (and a colour version?) a lot not too long ago.
> 
> Oh, it's a version of etc/gnu.xpm, which already got deleted.

If this means you will delete emacs21.ico as well, I think that's not
the right thing.

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> If this means you will delete emacs21.ico as well, I think that's not
> the right thing.
>   
Why are the Windows icons to be treated differently?

I don't see the sense in keeping unused cruft around. It just gets in 
the way for people new to Emacs who are trying to understand how it fits 
together.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 10:13:15 +0000
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>, cyd@stupidchicken.com, rms@gnu.org,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > If this means you will delete emacs21.ico as well, I think that's not
> > the right thing.
> >   
> Why are the Windows icons to be treated differently?

I didn't say they should.  I didn't track this discussion close enough
to realize emacs21.ico has something to do with non-Windows icons.  If
those non-Windows icons were deleted as well, I think we should
restore them as well.

> I don't see the sense in keeping unused cruft around.

They are unused by default, but quite usable, if someone wants to have
the old icons.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> If this means you will delete emacs21.ico as well, I think that's not
> the right thing.

It was already deleted (though not by me). If you can find the legal
info for etc/gnu.xpm (from which this icon was derived, I'm assuming),
both can be restored. I have tried to find said info but I can't.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Cc: rms@gnu.org,  cyd@stupidchicken.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:02:04 -0500
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > If this means you will delete emacs21.ico as well, I think that's not
> > the right thing.
> 
> It was already deleted (though not by me). If you can find the legal
> info for etc/gnu.xpm (from which this icon was derived, I'm assuming),
> both can be restored. I have tried to find said info but I can't.

Are we going to say that gnu.xpm, which was part of Emacs for as long
as I can remember, did not have its copyright issues resolved?  I find
that ridiculous, and the ``solution'' to delete it appalling at best.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

In what year was gnu.xpm installed?

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> In what year was gnu.xpm installed?
>   

1999, by Dave Love. But that may have been a renaming, as I recall 
seeing that icon associated with Emacs much earlier than 1999.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:28:16 +0000
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, rgm@gnu.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Richard Stallman wrote:
> > In what year was gnu.xpm installed?
> >   
> 
> 1999, by Dave Love. But that may have been a renaming, as I recall 
> seeing that icon associated with Emacs much earlier than 1999.

1999 is when Emacs moved to CVS, not when gnu.xpm was installed.

The oldest tarball of Emacs I have is 19.34b (released in Aug 1996);
gnu.xpm in that tarball has the time stamp of 1994-11-22 15:52:40,
which would place its introduction at no later than v19.30.  This is
consistent with my distant memories of using it in Emacs 19.26 or
19.30.  Unfortunately, etc/ChangeLog keeps silent about when gnu.xpm
was added.

If someone has earlier tarballs, perhaps they could look and report
their findings.

Re: NT icons

[Andreas Schwab]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> If someone has earlier tarballs, perhaps they could look and report
> their findings.

See ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/emacs.  The file was added in 19.29.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
> Cc: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 22:22:42 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > If someone has earlier tarballs, perhaps they could look and report
> > their findings.
> 
> See ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/emacs.  The file was added in 19.29.

Thanks for looking into all those .diff.gz files.

Re: NT icons

[Jason Rumney]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 1999 is when Emacs moved to CVS, not when gnu.xpm was installed.
>
> The oldest tarball of Emacs I have is 19.34b (released in Aug 1996);
> gnu.xpm in that tarball has the time stamp of 1994-11-22 15:52:40

Strange. Most files retained their history from RCS when they were 
moved. There must have been a problem with this file which caused it to 
be added separately.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 21:26:15 +0000
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Strange. Most files retained their history from RCS when they were 
> moved.

I think none of the binary files kept their RCS history, and that
includes files in nt/icons/.  For example, compare msdos/emacs.pif (a
binary file) with the rest of files in that directory.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    1999, by Dave Love. But that may have been a renaming, as I recall 
    seeing that icon associated with Emacs much earlier than 1999.

I am sure it was earlier, so can you find when the original icon
was installed?

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:14:47 -0500
> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I can't find any info about emacs21.ico, which is annoying, because I
> know I used to see it (and a colour version?) a lot not too long ago.

??? I posted just a day or two ago in this thread that emacs21.ico was
renamed from emacs.ico.

This was the standard Emacs icon before we switched to the new one,
the one that shows a notebook, not long ago.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> ??? I posted just a day or two ago in this thread that emacs21.ico was
> renamed from emacs.ico.

I know. Please point me to the legal info for emacs.ico.

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Cc: rms@gnu.org,  cyd@stupidchicken.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:55:19 -0500
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > ??? I posted just a day or two ago in this thread that emacs21.ico was
> > renamed from emacs.ico.
> 
> I know. Please point me to the legal info for emacs.ico.

But you yourself found it in this thread, as this message from you
says:

   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00663.html

As for your question there, this entry from nt/ChangeLog supplies the
answer:

    1999-01-22  Geoff Voelker  <voelker@cs.washington.edu>

	* icons: New directory with Davenport's icons.
	* icons/sink.ico: Renamed from emacs.ico.

	* makefile.nt (install, fast_install): Install Windows icons
	into etc/icons.

	* emacs.rc (ICON): Use icons/gnu2a32.ico as the default icon.

Translation: Geoff Voelker accepted icons from Davenport, stored them
in the nt/icons directory, and while at that, renamed the old
emacs.ico into sink.ico, to clear the way for the new emacs.ico he
received from Davenport.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> Translation: Geoff Voelker accepted icons from Davenport, stored them
> in the nt/icons directory, and while at that, renamed the old
> emacs.ico into sink.ico, to clear the way for the new emacs.ico he
> received from Davenport.

Yes, if you read between the lines, this is what most likely occurred.
But it's not actually stated in plain English, and the old emacs.ico
is not one of the ones distributed on Rob Davenport's website. So I'll
send him a mail to ask. But I fear that this icon was simply derived
from gnu.xpm, so its restoration would depend on gnu.xpm's provenance.

Re: NT icons

[Glenn Morris]

Glenn Morris wrote:

> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
>> Translation: Geoff Voelker accepted icons from Davenport, stored them
>> in the nt/icons directory, and while at that, renamed the old
>> emacs.ico into sink.ico, to clear the way for the new emacs.ico he
>> received from Davenport.
>
> Yes, if you read between the lines, this is what most likely occurred.

I asked Rob Davenport, and he said that he did NOT create what is now
emacs21.ico. He suggested asking Geoff Voelker.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    Yes, if you read between the lines, this is what most likely occurred.
    But it's not actually stated in plain English, and the old emacs.ico
    is not one of the ones distributed on Rob Davenport's website. So I'll
    send him a mail to ask.

Please ask both Voelker and Davenport.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    Translation: Geoff Voelker accepted icons from Davenport, stored them
    in the nt/icons directory, and while at that, renamed the old
    emacs.ico into sink.ico, to clear the way for the new emacs.ico he
    received from Davenport.

I remember seeing that before.  Which of the two is the one we are
concerned with?  Is it the old emacs.ico, now sink.ico?  Or the new one
from Davenport?

Re: NT icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> CC: rgm@gnu.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:06:31 -0500
> 
>     Translation: Geoff Voelker accepted icons from Davenport, stored them
>     in the nt/icons directory, and while at that, renamed the old
>     emacs.ico into sink.ico, to clear the way for the new emacs.ico he
>     received from Davenport.
> 
> I remember seeing that before.  Which of the two is the one we are
> concerned with?  Is it the old emacs.ico, now sink.ico?  Or the new one
> from Davenport?

The new one from Davenport.  The old emacs.ico was renamed to
sink.ico, as the ChangeLog entry says.

Re: NT icons

[Richard Stallman]

    The new one from Davenport.  The old emacs.ico was renamed to
    sink.ico, as the ChangeLog entry says.

There is no problem with any of the icons we got from Davenport.
We have papers from him.