Re: License Notice for ELPA packages

[Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org>
>> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 21:41:40 +0200
>> 
>> I'm about to update the license notice header for files distributed with
>> AUCTeX and wanted to ask if there is a preferred one for ELPA package.
>> I've seen several versions compared to this[1]:
>> 
>> • vertico.el says it is part of GNU Emacs, and then uses the license for
>>   small programs[2].
>> 
>> • pulsar.el says it is NOT part of GNU Emacs with the part for small
>>   programs[3].
>> 
>> • svg-lib.el is also NOT part of GNU Emacs, but uses a diffent last
>>   paragraph than in [1,4].
>> 
>> • pinentry.el says it is part of GNU Emacs, talks also about GNU Emacs
>>   in other places as well[5].
>> 
>> Where to go?
>
> Stefan and Philip, what are our policies in this regard?

As ELPA packages are regarded to be part of Emacs (and distributed under
the same license), the comment should say "is part of GNU Emacs".

By grepping through the ELPA packages, I notice a lot (most? all?)
packages by Protesilaos and Jose (both in the CCs) have the wrong
comment.  I hope they can fix that.  For the other packages I'd have to
check if they are maintained in elpa.git or not, and then contact the
maintainers accordingly.

-- 
	Philip Kaludercic on siskin