Re: [forge-dev] EPL header required?
I'm all for simple too - the full header is the minimal version red hat legal
commissioned ~5 years ago.
Time does seem to fix things :)
Sent from a mobile device
On 08/08/2012, at 23.25, Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 05:01:54PM -0400, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> Hey Richard, Max,
>
> Do you know what type of tasks we need to complete in order to be "correctly
> licensed" under the EPL?
>
> Such as:
>
> 1. Include LICENSE file in base of project and deliverable archives.
Yes.
> 2. Include license header in all source files
Good idea. I've never liked the IBM/Eclipse-style license notices
(probably what Max is using :) and recently recommended this to
Galder:
Copyright 2012 Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
Licensed under the Eclipse Public License version 1.0, available at
http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html
I'd say use something as simple as that.
- Richard