On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 15:52:33 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > I don't really see how a public domain dedication makes things simpler > than BSD/MIT-X11/AFL/CC-do-whatever-you-want for anybody, though. I > think it's a good idea to pick a single one of those (probably not AFL > for tests, since it has that annoying "try to get recipients to agree > to the license" clause).
Minor self-correction: we seem to be using an MIT license, not a BSD one. I was just observing that some Darcs hackers seem to be averse to including the boilerplate from tests/EXAMPLE.sh and prefer to write things like "Public domain - 2010 Fred Bloggs" So I thought maybe we could just bend with this. I'm looking to see if there's an acceptable two-liner ie. that deals with the warranty thing reasonably clearly. I'm not 100% certain this will defeat the laziness problem, but maybe it will help for darcs hackers who are simply boilerplate averse. If not, I'll just drop the issue and MIT it shall be. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> For a faster response, please try +44 (0)1273 64 2905.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
