On Oct 21 18:41, David Sastre wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Oct 21 13:02, Luke Kendall wrote: > > > Can I ask a related question: for the few shell scripts and /etc > > > files provided in base-files: what license are they under? The > > > package contains lots of licenses, as we've been discussing, but I > > > couldn't find any indication of which license applies to the actual > > > non-license files in base-files itself! > > > > Isn't that hard on the verge of nit-picking? These are simple scripts. > > Their Linux brothers and sisters are under PD so I think it makes much > > sense to define the Cygwin files as PD, too. > > > > David, that's ok with you? > > Yes, it's ok for me :) > > Also, it's possible to specifically mention it in the header of every > shellscript in base-files, maybe using CC0[1][2]? > > CC0 would then be included under /usr/share/doc/common-licenses.
Sounds good. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple