On 12 September 2013 18:20, Arnaud Héritier <aherit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The point is: >> the N&L files should be at the top-level of SCM. >> That is because SCM URLs are published, so the readers need to know >> the what the license conditions are. >> > > For the License when you are reading some code hosted on apache.org I think > nobody should have a doubt about it.
Not all code included in our SCM is necessarily AL-licensed. Obviously it has to be AL-compatible so the project as a whole is AL, but parts can be non-AL. > >> >> The fact that having the N&L files there would likely have ensured >> they were in the source archive is an added bonus; it's not the >> primary reason for having them at the top-level of SCM. >> >> > Arnaud >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > > > -- > ----- > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
