Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/tmp/mmake-2.2.1$ cat LICENSE > COPYRIGHT GNUGPL (c) 1998-2001 Jan-Henrik Haukeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Redistribution and use with or without modification, are permitted > provided that the above copyright notice can be reproduced. Please see > the enclosed GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE file for complete details. > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/tmp/mmake-2.2.1$ > > Seems ok to me, though a little bit non-standard.
The problem with this is that it does not actually say which files this applies to. > > In the old version, he did so in the file LICENSE, but that is > > technically not enough--you must do so in such a way that identifies > > *which files* are being licensed. The normal way is to put the > > A LICENSE file in the root of package surely implies it applies to the > whole tarball, doesn't it? I've *never* seen a package with a copyright > statement that listed the source files that were going with that > copyright... Thomas, can you name one package that does so? It's like you didn't even read what I wrote. The normal way is to put a reference to the GPL in every file right next to the copyright. For examples, see GNU Emacs, GCC, coreutils, and many others. > Anyway, could you please continue this discussion on -legal? This isn't > really a topic for discussion on -qa. Actually, just see me personally. I'm now the mmake maintainer, so there is no need for -qa discussion. :) Thomas
