4:01 p.m.
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.
2. Include license header in all source files
What do we need to do to be "correct" ?
Thanks!
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
4:27 p.m.
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
11:38 a.m.
Lincoln is a big fan of simple :)
As always, thanks for the prompt and insightful response!
-Dan
--
Sent from my CyanogenMod-powered
Android device, an open platform for
carriers, developers and consumers.
On Aug 8, 2012 6:10 PM, "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
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
11:44 a.m.
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
12:29 p.m.
There's always time to set new precedent ;)
Thank you Richard!
~Lincoln
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Max Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com> wrote:
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
>
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
4492
days inactive
4493
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Dan Allen -
Lincoln Baxter, III -
Max Andersen -
Richard Fontana