I totally agree with you. What confuses me, though, is the fact that the
ASF doesn't control and enforce its policies in every project.
Communication is the key. always....

> > I think I need to bring up a subject that not so comfortable but that
> > has to be brought up again IMO. On the Avalon dev list they fight again
> > between long and short licences in source code. We have the short form
> > but it seems like we have to switch (back?) to the long form.
> >
> > Here's the link to the discussion:
> >
> >
> > What do you think?
> It's news to me that the board changed their mind. I'm not saying that they
> did not, it's just I haven't heard that they now forbid the short form. I'll
> see what I can find out.
> And in fact the short form was explicitly okayed some time ago. When we
> decided to switch over it wasn't just an off-the-cuff haphazard decision.
> Personally I think the long form stinks. Every source file I open from an
> ASF project I immediately have to scroll down 1 or 2 pages to see actual
> source. And just copying and pasting the long Jakarta license into a text
> editor I see that it is 2700 bytes. Multiply that by 500 source files or
> 1000 source files and you have 0.5 MB or 1 MB (uncompressed) of garbage when
> a simple short pointer to a _single_ long license in the distro ought to be
> enough. These were both points that have been expressed before and I think
> they are still valid.
> But that's common sense. When did licensing ever mesh with common sense? :-)
> If we have to switch back to the long form, oh well. Not much choice there.

Jeremias Märki

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to