Re: Git mirrors

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Burton Samograd writes:

 > What does it take to make a project an 'offical GNU project'?

See "What it means for a program to be a GNU package" in
<URL:http://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.html>

 > Why could git not be an 'offical GNU project'?

In a word, "Linus Torvalds."

More seriously, take a look at the source.  Although it *is* GPLv2, a
grep through the documentation in /usr/share/doc/git-1.7.7 on a Gentoo
system showed exactly one reference to the GPL, which states that the
only license for git is GPLv2.  I don't recall seeing any
copyright/permission headers anywhere in the tree, and no
advertisements for free software or GNU or the FSF.  This is not a
candidate for a GNU package, in fact if I didn't know Linus is too
stiff-necked to pull an Eric A. Young I'd think this was a deliberate
strategy to prevent inclusion of git as a GNU package.

Linus *does* free software, but he is unwilling to pay lip service to
the Free Software Movement just to get the GNU imprimatur on his code,
and pretty obviously he has a very different take on the whole thing
from the Free Software Movement.