Re: License file

2013-05-31 Thread Nicholas Marriott
I've added this file with some minor tweaks, thanks! On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 10:25:03PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Nicholas, > > Am 09.05.2013 um 22:07 schrieb Nicholas Marriott: > > I think we just need the licenses not every copyright and lists of files > > which is a pain to keep u

Re: License file

2013-05-09 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
Hi Nicholas, Am 09.05.2013 um 22:07 schrieb Nicholas Marriott: > I think we just need the licenses not every copyright and lists of files > which is a pain to keep up to date. Ok, would the information below what you have in mind? > In fact I wonder if just a line or two at the end of the README

Re: License file

2013-05-09 Thread Nicholas Marriott
I think we just need the licenses not every copyright and lists of files which is a pain to keep up to date. In fact I wonder if just a line or two at the end of the README would be enough. On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 05:36:56PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Am 07.05.2013 um 17

Re: License file

2013-05-07 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
Hi Thomas, Am 07.05.2013 um 17:32 schrieb Thomas Adam: > On 7 May 2013 16:24, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> I imported the license summary in Debian-style: >> https://sourceforge.net/p/tmux/tmux-code/merge-requests/4/ >> >> Is this ok or do you have suggestions for modification? > > Looks OK, b

Re: License file

2013-05-07 Thread Thomas Adam
On 7 May 2013 16:24, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > I imported the license summary in Debian-style: > https://sourceforge.net/p/tmux/tmux-code/merge-requests/4/ > > Is this ok or do you have suggestions for modification? Looks OK, but what's the reason behind having a File: section? It seems inco

Re: License file

2013-05-07 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
Hi Nicholas, Am 07.05.2013 um 15:03 schrieb Nicholas Marriott: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:17:23PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> Am 25.04.2013 um 23:57 schrieb Nicholas Marriott >> : >>> The relevant license/copyright is at the top of every source file, I >>> don't think we need it in anot

Re: License file

2013-05-07 Thread Nicholas Marriott
e of downstream packagers easier and is pretty common to do so, Sure I think this would be ok. > alternative I could make a concatenated LICENSE file during autogen with the > extracted and unified licenses of all files. > > > Best regards > > -- Dago > > >

Re: License file

2013-04-27 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
gers easier and is pretty common to do so, > alternative I could make a concatenated LICENSE file during autogen with the > extracted and unified licenses of all files. I just stumbled over the COPYING notice from libarchive, which is also a combination of several licenses for different files and I

Re: License file

2013-04-26 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
. Would you accept a patch with the respective LICENSE.* files to be included in the tarball as modeled in Debian? It would make the life of downstream packagers easier and is pretty common to do so, alternative I could make a concatenated LICENSE file during autogen with the extracted and unified l

Re: License file

2013-04-25 Thread Nicholas Marriott
Hi The relevant license/copyright is at the top of every source file, I don't think we need it in another place. Note that it differs for some files in compat/ and examples/. IIRC Debian have a full list of all the licenses in some file in their package. On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:46:56PM +0200

License file

2013-04-24 Thread Dagobert Michelsen
Hi, it would be cool if the license of tmux could be added to the repo/tarball so I as downstream packager can include it in the binary package. Maybe something like LICENSE or such. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do s