There were a couple general themes during the review: - Reuse of Eclipse code (often due to visibility restrictions) means we cannot relicense the duplicate as dual EPL+BSD (it must keep original headers and only be EPL) - Questions on authorship (basically does the author know we switched license) - Needing to hunt down Axios customers
And a couple places where we are "stuck" on process… Files such as about.html, notice.html or referencing LGPL are all flagged buy Sharon's review as "non standard". In this case we are following the eclipse legal guidelines (http://www.eclipse.org/legal/guidetolegaldoc2.php) but since we are not distributed by Eclipse yet we are not in position to "be standard" :) If we were a closed source project we could update this stuff "in private" and give Sharon a ready to go source bundle. Since we are working in a public repository (as a distributed team) we can only stage this information with accurate headers for today, not as they will appear when the final result in an eclipse repository. As an example: even though Sharon offers to give us correct copyright, license headers and about files - we are not in a position to use them until we have an eclipse repository to use them. If we accepted them we would place Eclipse in an odd situation of a GitHub repository publishing Eclipse Foundation content … before the foundation had accepted the work. -- Jody Garnett
_______________________________________________ User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) http://udig.refractions.net http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
