Mock classes without ASF license

[Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>]

Hi:

We (Cocoon Community) already wrote some mock classes in blocks to allow
sucessful compile even if a non-redistributed jar is missing. ie: mock
classes in OJB block for JDO support.

Currently, these mock java classes have not copyright notice. Is this
correct? or we need to include a copyright notice and the respective ASL
in each of these file?

BTW, seeing that the ASL 2.0 need less code inside each source. I wonder
how many kB will lose the current Cocoon code. ;-)

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo

Re: Mock classes without ASF license

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:

> Dirk-Willem van Gulik dijo:
> >
> > On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick response ;-)

The wonders of a laptop going into repairs (with some stuff still in the
sent mail queue) and it coming back with the HD still intact. I have to
admit - it did puzzle me a bit too!

Dw

Re: Mock classes without ASF license

[Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>]

Dirk-Willem van Gulik dijo:
>
>
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>
>> Currently, these mock java classes have not copyright notice. Is this
>> correct? or we need to include a copyright notice and the respective ASL
>> in each of these file?
>
> No every file should have the right copyright text and the url to the
> 2.0 license. Be aware that -without- any such text things fall back to the
> default which essentially is 'do not touch, do not (re)distribute' which
> is not what we want :-)

Thanks for the quick response ;-)

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo

Re: Mock classes without ASF license

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>]

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:

> Currently, these mock java classes have not copyright notice. Is this
> correct? or we need to include a copyright notice and the respective ASL
> in each of these file?

No every file should have the right copyright text and the url to the
2.0 license. Be aware that -without- any such text things fall back to the
default which essentially is 'do not touch, do not (re)distribute' which
is not what we want :-)

Dw.