> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> why do we have all these licences in different places, most (all?)
> of them are in the legal directory, but some are also(!) in the
> lib/core and lib/optional directory.
>
> And some are even misnamed (we have xalan 2.2.0 licence, but
> xalan 2.3.1 jar; same with xerces etc.)
>
> Can we sort this out?
"Morrison, John" wrote:
>
> A higher authority spoke.
>
> Can't remember who put them in, but I didn't recognise the username.
> Check the CVS history.
Ted Leung did, on behalf of the XML PMC.
But I completely agree with Carsten: dear PMC, please, tell us: is it
fine to have *all* the legal stuff in the /legal directory instead of
having it intermixed with the rest of the jars and such?
Can we go ahead and remove those licenses in /lib and just go on on
/legal as we have been doing in the past?
Moreover: did the FOP project resolve the issue with the JIMI library
which is currently the only one we have legal problems with?
Thanks.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
