Hi Arthur!

"Arthur A. Gleckler" <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 12:58 PM Maxim Cournoyer <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-48/pull/15/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-125/pull/10/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-126/pull/15/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-128/pull/14/files
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-151/pull/6/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-160/pull/20/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-178/pull/17/files
>>
>> https://github.com/scheme-requests-for-implementation/srfi-209/pull/17/files
>>
>>
>
> I've merged all of these changes.  I've made minor changes, e.g. moving the
> SPDX declaration comment inside the HTML head element of each document, and
> I fixed unrelated HTML warnings along the way.
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 1:42 PM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just checked SRFI 209.  Doesn't your patch now remove the embedded
>> license in some files?
>>
>
> Thanks for reviewing that.  I checked Maxim's latest version of the patch,
> and it doesn't have that problem.
>
> Thanks to Maxim for making all those changes, and to everyone for their
> reviews.  245 SRFIs to go!

Thanks a lot to you for having the patience to follow-up on the PR and
the research on the historical licensing agreements.

The refinements to the 'reuse' tool have been merged upstream, so in
theory it should be easy for anyone to use 'reuse annotate' on Scheme
files now, producing the correct comments (;;;).

I'll respond to your request for changes, then proceed with a fresh
batch!

--
Thanks,
Maxim