On 15.12.2011 16:37, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi;
--- Gio 15/12/11, Rob Weir<robw...@apache.org> ha scritto:
...
This is a good start, and thanks, Pedro, for reaching out
to them.
But we'll need more than a private email to make this
suitable for inclusion in default source releases.
I am aware of this.
I just brought the matter here because we should be
planning to update the bsh tarball and it's corresponding
patch to the latest version so that we don't have
unexpected surprises later on.
Is I said earlier, as soon as the code is officially under Apache
license, I will do the necessary changes, which will not be much work.
While here:
The patch for beanshell and others, carries a Makefile
with an LGPL header: these should all be updated.
In ucpp we are using already an AL2 header: perhaps
I am naive but we should probably not use any license
headers for files in patches and assume they are under
the same license as the upstream code.
Hm, both patches do the same thing: create a new file (makefile.mk), not
modify a previously existing file. For a newly created patch it
naturally has a AL2 license. For an older patch I would expect that to
be part of the SGA which would allow us to change its license.
-Andre
cheers,
Pedro.
