Well I guess the question then goes to Alexandre (and everyone else in general... but he wrote this code), before I go playing with the pom to get the MIT license header check working and the site including the text correctly.... any objections to re-licensing under ASL? If you have them, I'll go figure out how to get the project license page and the checkstyle header check working correctly.... if not I'll switch over to ASL.
To be clear. I don't mind whether we stay MIT or move to ASL (although obviously switching to ASL is less work for me, I don't mind playing with the pom and site until I get it right) -Stephen 2008/9/29 Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I think most plugins use the ASL license actually. I think the mojo site > states that the MIT license is preferred, because the Codehaus states that > the MIT license is preferred. But I believe you are free to use any valid > open-source license which the Codehaus will accept. > > --jason > > > > On Sep 29, 2008, at 2:51 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: > > OK, >> >> On the codehaus site for submitting a plugin it says that the recommended >> license is the MIT license. >> >> I cannot find a plugin on mojo that uses MIT and correctly includes the >> text of the license on the project site >> >> Also, i'm looking for an example checkstyle config for the mit header >> >> any pointers? >> >> -Stephen >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
