Kevin Dangoor wrote:
> Matt Kruse, author of the calendar we were talking about a couple days
> ago, responded to my request for license clarification. He's out to
> make sure that he doesn't get hit by crazy support problems from
> people using old or hacked versions of his code.
>
> His requests, quoted from his message to me:
>
> """
> 1. Keep the headers in place so people can find the original source
> 2. If you change the source to integrate it or change it, please not that 
> these
> are your changes and NOT part of the original
> 3. If users have problems with the script, please support it rather than
> directing them to my site, as it is now bundled with your framework which I'm
> not familiar with
> 4. Try to keep your code in sync with the code on my site, as I occasionally
> release new versions to fix bugs, support new browsers, etc.
> 5. In releasing my code within your framework, it must NOT be released under
> the same license (MIT) as your own, and instead must carry with it my 
> "special"
> limitations.
> """
>
> We can certainly package these scripts up, and they look good. We
> should just do so in separate projects. That'll make it easy to make
> the license terms clear and update those packages whenever the
> original JavaScript code updates.
>

Basically this means using a separated egg? right? like the TinyMCE
widget Alberto has done.

Ciao
Michele


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TurboGears Trunk" 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/turbogears-trunk
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to