On 1/1/02 2:54 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: >> Putting aside *all* the stuff we are talking about for a moement, and >> looking at the simple notion of just having release jars available w/o docs, >> source, etc I don't think this is a bad idea :) >> >> However.... >> >> Any license issues? Wouldn't we want to package the jar w/ a license ? > > This simple notion -- and my putting together a Jakarta release HOWTO -- > is why I opened this particular thread. > > The license issue is well taken. I think it would be a good practice for > us to include a license in all of our JARs. Even when we don't > distribute them seperately ourselves, they are intended to be > distributed seperately by our licensees. Point noted. > It was more of a question than a point :) I was painting a bathroom (sort of like a bike shed, but my wife dictated the color :) and started wondering about binary distribution issues... -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
