Subject: [bug#47086] [PATCH] gnu: tig: Update to 2.5.3.

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 10:43:25 +0100

Hi Efraim,

Efraim Flashner <[email-masked]> skribis:

> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 12:05:06PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> "jgart" <[email-masked]> skribis:
>> 
>> > From ab371a326536a91f7e1caa288e25a9a0818e2b7b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > From: LibreMiami <[email-masked]>
>> > Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 23:49:11 -0500
>> > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: tig: Update to 2.5.3.
>> >
>> > * gnu/packages/version-control.scm (tig): Update to 2.5.3.
>> >
>> > Co-authored-by: jgart <[email-masked]>
>> > Co-authored-by: donotshake <donotshake:matrix.org>
>> 
>> Applied.
>> 
>> However I agree with zimoun that assigning copyright to LibreMiami is
>> debatable.
>> 
>
> Is it really that different than everyone involved assigning their
> copyright to LibreMiami as an aggregator and then sending the patch in?

IIUC there’s no LibreMiami legal entity, so it’s not possible to assign
copyright to LibreMiami.

Ludo’.