Thanks for all the input, people. FWIW, The folks downstream said their motivation was the continual difficulty of automatically checking for acceptable licenses on the many bits of (allegedly) FOSS they use. They have 4k of filenames that the license checker can't currently account for, and re-checking them all manually every few months is a continual drain.
I'll roll over on this one. That the world is the way it is raises my hackles, but no point me making life harder for some other blameless devs. I'll squeeze it into 80 chars per file somehow. Thanks for the pointers on that. Jonathan Hartley http://tartley.com Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 16:13 +0100, Jonathan Hartley wrote: >> Why would a file ever be seen out of context? Surely to make my source >> available without the LICENSE file is breaking the terms of my license, >> so I'm not sure why I ought to jump through hoops just to cater for such >> people. Am I wrong? > >You are both right and wrong. You are right that this should be the case >in (programmer) logic. However the issue is what does the amalgam of >statute, case law, barristers and judges make of the situation. > >I would suggest either complying with the request, or withdraw the >material from licenced use. > >-- >Russel. >============================================================================= >Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net >41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk >London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder > >_______________________________________________ >python-uk mailing list >python-uk@python.org >https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk _______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
