Hi,
> Alex: Ok, I'll ask on legal-discuss.
I've already asked on general@icubator - given they deal with LICENCE an
dNOTICE all of the time it seemed a good place to ask.
> Alex: No disagreement there. I think we've handled that correctly by not
> including the full text of the MIT and BSD licenses in the LICENSE file.
Then why do you want to add BSD back into LICENCE? Adding the short or long
version has the same effect legally and is not required for source
distributions (see below).
> Apache does not have a license to those files.
Not sure what you mean there, they are licensed under BSD and by the terms of
the BSD licence we can use the source code as long as we leave the headers in
place. Note that it's only a binary distribution that requires the BSD licence
to be placed elsewhere. That's 2 of the 3 clauses of the BSD licence.
* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
The header are the only place the BSD license is found in FlexUnit 1 [1] -
there is no LICENSE file or anything else.
> Alex: Because we normally ask those filing bugs to provide steps to
> reproduce.
It's on my list to do, but I'm not full time on this project or paid to work on
it so not sure when I'll be able to get to it.
Thanks,
Justin
1. http://opensource.adobe.com/svn///opensource/flexunit/trunk/
