You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com> on 2006/06/01 04:30:18 UTC
Re: Many duplications of license
Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net> writes:
> Kobayashi Noritada wrote:
>> So, there are many license
>> descriptions and copyright notices:
>>
>> * COPYING
>> * subversion/LICENSE
>> * www/project_license.html
>> * www/license-1.html
>> * copyright notice at the heads of source files
>>
>> All of them are necessary?
>> And in the copyright notices in all of them, we can still find "2000-2004".
>> Shouldn't we modify them?
>
> Individual source files may be being updated only on change, but we
> still need to bump the global license every year.
>
> Regarding the massive duplication, does anyone see any problems with:
>
> * Deleting subversion/LICENSE - it is redundant with COPYING.
>
> * Making www/project_license.html simply link to www/license-1.html.
>
> * Maybe making COPYING just refer to www/license-1.html ?
I think it might be the case that COPYING needs to contain the actual
license text. I am not a lawyer, but until a lawyer speaks up, let's
err on the side of safety.
Having both LICENSE and COPYING is probably unnecessary, though. Or,
if we must have both, the former should simply refer to the latter or
to www/license-1.html.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Many duplications of license
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
Karl Fogel wrote:
> Having both LICENSE and COPYING is probably unnecessary, though. Or,
> if we must have both, the former should simply refer to the latter or
> to www/license-1.html.
If only Subversion could version some sort of symbolic link thingy...
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: Many duplications of license
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Naming the file containing our license "LICENSE" seems far more
> reasonable to me than calling it "COPYING", but that's just my
> opinion...
I agree, and suspect COPYING is just a (not-so-brilliant) GNU-ism.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: Many duplications of license
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 6/1/06, Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com> wrote:
> I think it might be the case that COPYING needs to contain the actual
> license text. I am not a lawyer, but until a lawyer speaks up, let's
> err on the side of safety.
I find that rather difficult to believe. There are a great many
projects that don't include a file named "COPYING", and they seem to
be getting along just fine.
> Having both LICENSE and COPYING is probably unnecessary, though. Or,
> if we must have both, the former should simply refer to the latter or
> to www/license-1.html.
Naming the file containing our license "LICENSE" seems far more
reasonable to me than calling it "COPYING", but that's just my
opinion...
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org