outsourced license

[Sebastian-71]

Hi,

some projects, TextExtractor, Nachos, ..., have source files without an elaborate license statement on top. Instead they simply point to a license file within the project:

"See LICENSE file for licensing".

So you basically have to modify only one location if you want to change the license, but it is also a bit ambiguous.

I wonder if this meets Savannah requirements or whether we should tell the applicants to be more specific.


Regards
Sebastian
--
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01

[Sylvain Beucler-2]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 07:34:12AM +0200, Sebastian Gerhardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some projects, TextExtractor, Nachos, ..., have source files without an elaborate license statement on top. Instead they simply point to a license file within the project:
>
> "See LICENSE file for licensing".
>
> So you basically have to modify only one location if you want to change the license, but it is also a bit ambiguous.
>
> I wonder if this meets Savannah requirements or whether we should tell the applicants to be more specific.

I suggest they be more specific.

I think the goal is that I can pick a file from a project and add it
to my own, and the file will retain copyright information.

In the standard GPL notice, it refers to 'COPYING', but it precises
the name of the license and its version, as well as includes a
disclaimer of warranty.

--
Sylvain