Besides all the comments that have already been made, I don't think that unilaterally declaring the licence to be GPL is a particularly good idea.
There is an issue that not stating licence terms and terms under which contributions can be made would technically make the programs unusable if we wanted to nit pick. SImon Am 03.04.2013 20:39, schrieb Jeffrey Ollie: > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Kai Krueger <kakrue...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Any comments or suggestions on the development process of these two projects >> are welcome, > First off: YAY! > > Second, my first pull request submitted :) > > Third, I noticed that none of the source code files (at least the ones > I looked at) have a header with copyright and > permission information. If no one objects, I'll put together a pull > request that add headers like the following: > > /* > Copyright © 2013 OpenStreetMap > > This file is part of mod_tile. > > mod_tile is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it > under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the > Free Software Foundation, either version 2 of the License, or (at your > option) any later version. > > mod_tile is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but > WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > General Public License for more details. > > You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License > along with mod_tile. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. > */ > > -- > Jeff Ollie > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
