Hi Kevan, Thanks for your description. It cleared some of my doubts regarding this issue.
Thanks, Lasantha Ranaweera > > On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: > >> Lasantha, >> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only >> display ASF2 license. >> >> This is the text we have in trunk today >> >> <!-- >> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation >> >> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); >> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. >> You may obtain a copy of the License at >> >> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 >> >> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software >> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, >> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or >> implied. >> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and >> limitations under the License. >> --> >> >> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and >> add the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples >> you are updating. > > Lasantha should not be *removing* copyright statements from a source > file. The copyright holder should do that (i.e. someone from ibm). In > this case, it sounds like that has already been done. If that's true, > then Lasantha should just pick up the latest source. > > FYI, http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html contains the > current policy regarding source headers/license/copyright info. > Source headers should not contain copyright statements and the > license text has been updated. > > Lasantha, > Thanks for identifying this issue. > > --kevan > > > >
