On 11/03/12 12:20, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On 11/02/12 00:44, Chip Childers wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<robertburrelldon...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 10/29/12 13:46, Chip Childers wrote:
<snip>
Please do let me know if I can be of any assistance!
The descriptor[1] has a lot of<copyright-notice> elements for licenses
where they aren't necessary[2]. Did the documentations or the element
naming
(say) give the impression that this information is necessary - or
were they
included because that the way you want the LICENSE to be ...?
<snip>
Perhaps I hit a bug then, because I found that without a copyright
tag, with-license elements were being skipped.
I'll create some tests to investigate
With the latest code-base, the only difference after removing
copyright-notice elements from with-license elements is that the
copyright claims are gone. Could you check if the problem is fixed in
the current code base...?
Cheers
Robert
