Hi Bastian Doetsch wrote: > > Thanks for the patch! The functionality looks good. > > Although I don't like the ini4j inclusion too much. Any opinions about > that? We'd be including an Apache 2.0 licensed software within > MercurialEclipse.
It all boils down to license compabilety, dont know if they are (probably not compleatly). This is how TPTP seem to solve it: http://www.eclipse.org/tptp/home/documents/process/How_to_Incorporate_Non_EPL_Content_into_TPTP.html Don't know how easy it is to replace the ini4j stuff in the patch compared to "double licensing"? /Zingo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MercurialEclipse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mercurialeclipse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
