Sounds reasonable to me,

Chris


On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:36:56 -0700
Josh Holtzman <[email protected]> wrote:

> The more barriers we create to using msub, the more institutions will
> simply host their own vendor branches, so the *trends* in what
> institutions need to customize remain hidden from the community.
> That's why I believe we should encourage use of ECL2, but mandate
> only the limitations placed upon us by our svn host (open source with
> an OSI approved license).
> 
> Josh
> 
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Christopher Brooks
> <[email protected]>wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > > b) contain code that is distributed under an OSI approved license
> > > [6], prefereably ECL 2.0.
> >
> > If we are going to require a license I prefer it to be required
> > that we use ECL 2.0.  So there are no questions in the future or
> > muddy wading through svn logs.  And I prefer that everyone with
> > access have a CLA assigned.  Does this seem unreasonable?
> >
> > Chris
> > --
> > Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc
> > ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan
> >
> > Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938
> > Phone: 1.306.966.1442
> > Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems
> > Laboratory Department of Computer Science
> >     University of Saskatchewan
> >     176 Thorvaldson Building
> >     110 Science Place
> >     Saskatoon, SK
> >     S7N 5C9
> >



-- 
Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc
ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan

Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938
Phone: 1.306.966.1442
Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems Laboratory
     Department of Computer Science
     University of Saskatchewan
     176 Thorvaldson Building
     110 Science Place
     Saskatoon, SK
     S7N 5C9
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users

Reply via email to