> I can send it to you because I think it will have to be published
> somehow (we can do it ourselves) in order to stick with the license, but
> I'm sure it won't make sense for most of you... :-(
IANAL, but as I understand the terms, you only need to make your changes
available to the people yo
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 4:31 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can send it to you because I think it will have to be published
> somehow (we can do it ourselves) in order to stick with the license, but
> I'm sure it won't make sense for most of you... :-(
I'll try to figure this
Jiri,
I don't think it will be a valid patch, I mean, it is good for us since
we don't use some parts of the provider, but I'm sure it will break stuff.
I can send it to you because I think it will have to be published
somehow (we can do it ourselves) in order to stick with the license, but
I'
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will do. How should I publish the results? I mean, maybe they're not
> interesting for you guys, but I think it's required due to licensing, right?
You can send me patch. I'll review it, and commit to sources (if it
Hi,
>> I'm still using provider 1.7 since we've to keep .Net 1.1 compatibility.
>>
>
> The 1.1 isn't no longer under maintenance. But you can tweak it yourself. :)
>
>
I will do. How should I publish the results? I mean, maybe they're not
interesting for you guys, but I think it's requir
