To all:
I am very certain that this has been discussed at length (beating a
dead horse) on multiple occasions on community@, legal@, user and dev
@ commons, and probably others as well.
Do we really have to go over all of this again?
--
James Mitchell
On Aug 7, 2007, at 8:40 AM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2007/8/7, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 8/6/07, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
*sigh* Sometimes the ASF overhead can be such a pain... The headers
are fine when you use an IDE, but when you use vi, it means
scrolling
down the 50 or whatever lines every time, which is so annoying.
I agree with Don. Injecting all the licensing falderah into example
applications accomplishes no clear purpose. It's just licensing OCD.
Sorry for the ignorance, OCD=Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder? Ah ok I
got the
irony :-)
Maybe it's simply paranoia :-P
As a matter of law, the license in the root of the distribution covers
everything.
We reiterate headers in the source files just in case they are
separated from the distribution. In source code, when patent issues
and other concerns might be involved, embedding the copyright and
license might conceivably make a difference, somewhere, sometime.
(Though, I expect the scenarios remain far fetched.)
I agree with you, Ted: I think that the license headers are not
useful at
all. But I don't think this is the place for such a discussion,
since I
think that it should be decided at a "foundation-level". I think
that, if we
remove the license headers from example, we are outlaw in Apache
sense of
the term. We could discuss to change the law, but not in Struts
mailing
lists.
Antonio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
