Regarding the tokenizer I am quite sure I checked license
> > compatibility and then put the geotools header on top, leaving also
> > the old reference. Thinking about it back then it seemed the proper
> > way to me, but now I agree with you. I am not sure what should be
> > done. Can other license headers stay were they are if compatible,
> > right? Should it be mentioned?
> The tokenizer is perfectly compatible (LGPLv2). The Format class is the
> one that requires a new license statement when shipped:
>
> "Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
> documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution."
You can see some examples of how this is done for some of the other modules:
Include the license in the documentation for the module:
- http://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/extension/brewer/index.html
And link to it as a variation from the user guide welcome section:
- http://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/welcome/license.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability
What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know.
Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools
to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
