-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dennis Schridde wrote:
>> install-sh ... is that used for anything? If it can be automatically >> generated at the user site, then it should be generated, and left out >> of the repository. IMHO. I am not very good at licensing stuff, but it seems that this one is nothing to worry about. X11 license is compatible with the GPL, and is not actually owned by the warzone project. Anyway, if it is useless, getting rid of it may be a good idea. > Ok, so change the license of novideo.rpl to GPL (what it was before anyway, > just not stated correctly), change COMPILE* to GPL as well and hope we don't > get sued by Rod ;) and don't run ./autogen.sh for release tarballs anymore. > (Instead tell the user to do it.) So I can assume these are licensed under the GPL and treat it as an error in documentation, right? This seems a bit hazy to me, actually. How do you tell a difference between a file erroneously documented as proprietary from a proprietary file included among GPL'ed files? As far as I am aware, a license in a COPYING file does _not_ override copyright notices included in files themselves. At least that seems to be common sense among Debian Devs. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFDvkFztOe9mov/y4RAliCAKCD+UwU2FgvCXn3t0dWig4pMr+RCACcDPRN wS7hdzotXVP1NGPGH65gSFk= =Kyp6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
