On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 08:11:39PM -0500, Nicodemo Alvaro wrote: > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Lorenzo Becchi <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> There is a folder for OpenLayers in the tarball. I understand it is a > >> dependency, so there should not be a need to distribute it with the > >> project. Do not use the word open to refer to free software. There are > >> other > >> references to the project as "open source" should not be. > > > > > > You are right about Openlayers (OL) but this is an exception. The > > distribution we make of OL is a sub-selection of packages and then. The > > original OL is not distributed like that even if it is possible with some > > scripts distributed with it to make such a sub-selection. > Hi, Lorenzo, > > I am little confused here, so I am sending this to the hackers public > mailing list for some advice. > > Should I have Lorenzo change the name and references to the OL folder > and OpenLayers-.2.X.js files, or can I let it pass. There is copyright > date range issue in of the OpenLayers files. > > Some extra license notice are included in those files. I think the > COPYING.TXT should account and include the licenses for those.
I guess we can let it pass, provided there's a clear explanation of where the source code comes from and how it was assembled. -- Sylvain
