This may need more work before proceeding---I've
looked at Xalan, Cocoon, Axis--none of them are
licensing their shell scripts and batch files--nor
their to-do lists and related files--so if this is an
oversight with us--so it is with everyone.

Two (Xalan and Axis) do have a copyright statement on
their Ant build.xml; however, that's not the Apache
license but a standard copyright notice that would
appear to prevent users from modifying them--I don't
think this is what is wanted either.  

We probably need Apache-wide direction on this, and
FOP should follow what is done by the more established
projects such as Xalan, Struts, etc.  If FOP is to
actually move our, say, 3 and 5 line shell scripts to
54 and 56 lines, respectively, *all* the projects
should be doing this--not just those who ask about it.

Another issue--perhaps the Apache license will need to
be reformatted into official versions that will work
with DOS batch scripts, Unix Shell scripts, to-do list
text files and XML documents, because the current
license appears designed for Java/C++ source only. 
(OTOH, such versions may already exist--I don't know.)


--- Dirk-Willem van Gulik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please Add ! And thanks for noticing this.
> Dw
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2003, Peter B. West wrote:
> > I have just noticed that there is no licence in
> build.xml, build.bat or
> > I assume this is an oversight, or do we
> have a dispensation?
> >
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, email:

Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

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

Reply via email to