Before doing any changes to the format of the license file, we should
carefully review the ASF guidelines, so that the license file (as it
should be now now) will follow the same format used by the other ASF
projects (and ASF recommendations).
I don't think the Authors section make a big
if I remember the discussion correctly, it was that since the
author(supposedly) was in the svn history, it was not necessary to have
the author in the header. I don't remember it being against the ASF policy.
From the few licenses I reviewed through the svn explorer they are more
verbose and
BJ Freeman wrote:
if I remember the discussion correctly, it was that since the
author(supposedly) was in the svn history, it was not necessary to have
the author in the header. I don't remember it being against the ASF policy.
From the few licenses I reviewed through the svn explorer they are
On Aug 10, 2008, at 7:58 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
BJ Freeman wrote:
if I remember the discussion correctly, it was that since the
author(supposedly) was in the svn history, it was not necessary to
have
the author in the header. I don't remember it being against the ASF
policy.
From the few
In the LICENSE file at the top of the ofbiz tree, there is a segment of
files that are under a BSD license. However, what follows is *NOT* the
actual license they are under, but a generic BSD-template. This means
we are not actually including the license each of those files is under.
