DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. INSTEAD, POST ANY RESPONSES TO THE LINK BELOW.
[STR New] Link: http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198 Version: 2.0-current Hi, all, I'd like to bring this license issue one step further. Although I'm not a FLTK 2 developer, I took the time to work out a patch [1] for the FLTK 2 license, and I hope that this will be confirmed by the team. Mike Sweet wrote in fltk.development on May 18, 2009 [2]: "Yes, FLTK2 should be using the same license as FLTK1. Go ahead and make the change..." Thus, I tried to update the FLTK 2 license so that it uses practically the same text as the current FLTK 1 license. I also changed the date(s) and some typos (?), e.g. Licence -> License. I'm aware that there are differences between British and American writing, but I think that at least where the (L)GPL is mentioned, we should use the _correct_ writing "License". What we need now is still: - confirmation of FLTK 2 developers, or probably Mike, Matt ? - confirmation of the Debian team, if this would suit their needs. One more point I'd like to have confirmed it that IMHO the new license text should include the _current_ date of its release, so that we would have to modify this again in the patch (before commit) to make it current. And: which "version number" will this new/amended license have? I used "2a" in the patch, but this might not be what we want. Please confirm or propose changes. I'm willing to update the subversion repository, if and _only_ if I can get confirmation from the FLTK and the Debian team. --------------------------------------------------------------- [1] http://www.fltk.org/strfiles/2198/license.diff [2] http://www.fltk.org/newsgroups.php?gfltk.development+v:7749 Link: http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198 Version: 2.0-current _______________________________________________ fltk-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-bugs
