Okay, I'm going to remove it from the clean-up parade.
Thanks
Justin
On 30-Mar-09, at 10:29 AM, Colin Clark wrote:
Hey,
On 27-Mar-09, at 9:32 AM, Anastasia Cheetham wrote:
On 27-Mar-09, at 8:32 AM, Justin wrote:
One thing that we forgot about in our svn restructuring meeting
was the need for a licenses directory. ( http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-1943
).
Thanks for pointing this out. Yes, this can probably be taken care
of later, but it's good to remember it.
I've made a comment on the issue, asking a question about it.
Just to clarify, this issue doesn't actually require us to move
around the license files within SVN. We'll want to stick with our
current scheme, which I think is pretty sensible. A top-level
LICENSE.txt file is included in the repository, and then individual
directories can contain a LICENSE file that overrides the standard
licensing scheme.
The issue is one of deployment: we assume that the product of our
build is a set of directories you can drop right into a web server
and start using. Deploying licenses alongside the JavaScript is
unnecessary, so as part of the build process we can move licenses
around or strip the files out completely.
This is an issue we can punt for Infusion 1.0.
Colin
---
Colin Clark
Technical Lead, Fluid Project
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre, University of Toronto
http://fluidproject.org
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
