At least in headers in bootstrap-*.js files I read /* ========================================================== * bootstrap-affix.js v2.1.0 * http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/javascript.html#affix * ========================================================== * Copyright 2012 Twitter, Inc. * * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and * limitations under the License. * ========================================================== */
... short header in css files though ... On 8/28/12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/28/2012 02:45 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 28.08.2012 15:31, Gary Martin wrote: >>> On 08/28/2012 02:11 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: >>>> On 28.08.2012 15:01, Gary Martin wrote: >>>>> Bootstrap - licensed under the APLv2 License >>>> What is the APLv2 License? You don't have to copy typos from the >>>> Bootstrap authors. :) >>>> >>>> It's "the Apache License, version 2", same as for Bloodhound. >>>> >>>> -- Brane >>>> >>> Heh.. sorry. My typo. >> The typo appears in Bootstrap's GitHub logs related to their LICENSE >> file. The file itself appears to be the original ALv2 as published on >> the Apache site. Haven't run a diff, though; it might not be too bad an >> idea to do that. >> >> -- Brane >> > > Oh, well, I didn't check to see if they had also made that mistake.. I > am only saying that I did not copy the mistake from them as I was > avoiding writing the whole thing out. I will try to be more careful in > future. > > Other than that, I assume that Bootstrap's typo do not cause us any > problem. From a quick look around the download, they sometimes only > mentioning http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt but there are > cases of mentioning Apache License v2.0 and Apache License, version 2.0. > I cannot see their intent being questioned here but, as we are committed > to attempting to get as close to perfection as possible with our > compliance with any licensing issues, I am happy to take some time to > look at this further if necessary. > > Anyway, I think I may as well make the changes I mentioned at the > beginning of the thread (hopefully without any more typos) and see what > happens. > > Cheers, > Gary > > -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article:
