Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Check: Is every FOP committer (especially the Europe-based ones) on the
party list??? I hope so. :-)
No. But I'm in London for the XML/WebServices in two weeks.
A few Cocooners have already signed on. Anybody else there?
J.Pietschmann
On 25.02.2003 18:11:29 Christian Geisert wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Maintenance branch is changed to full licence. I feel dizzy now. :-)
>
> A big thank you for doing this!
> (If I make it to Hannover I'll pay you a beer ;-)
Can we make that a Coke? Would be great to see you there. I wa
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Maintenance branch is changed to full licence. I feel dizzy now. :-)
A big thank you for doing this!
(If I make it to Hannover I'll pay you a beer ;-)
Christian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fo
Maintenance branch is changed to full licence. I feel dizzy now. :-)
On 20.02.2003 07:46:25 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long
> licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I can
> do it.
Jeremias Maerki
--
> -Original Message-
> From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: February 21, 2003 1:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Long licence
>
> On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>
> > I'd like to find out what lawyer thou
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> I'd like to find out what lawyer thought a long license is needed with every
> file. Because I question that finding.
Question the board@ (again) for a black/white answer - or work with
licensing@ for a more interactive reply.
But Bear in mind that
ASF members list. I have problems with
this decision.
Arved
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeremias Maerki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: February 21, 2003 9:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Long licence
>
>
> Arved,
>
> I don't see
Arved,
I don't see what's bad about it. The licence stays in every file as
necessary, the IDE should just as a service to the developer hide the
licence because it's not relevant to normal development tasks.
On 21.02.2003 14:01:34 Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> I find it odd that it's OK to suggest too
o find out what lawyer thought a long license is needed with every
file. Because I question that finding.
Arved
> -Original Message-
> From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: February 21, 2003 8:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Long licenc
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> software developers. :-) It would be so cool, if IDEs would have the
> ability to hide a licence at the beginning of a file.
I;ve seen some clever pragma's/markers which let emacs do this.
DW
--
I know. Everyone here at Apache feels the same but AFAIK this is not
possible. In today's world lawyers still seem to be more important than
software developers. :-) It would be so cool, if IDEs would have the
ability to hide a licence at the beginning of a file.
Anyway, I can't give you a def
Jeremias,
Can we put the copyright notice at the end of the files? It's a PITA
haaving it at the beginning. I'll change the FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design files.
Peter
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Thanks, your help is most welcome. Yes, we have to change all three :-)
codebases.
On 20.02.2003 08:33:31 Oleg
Thanks, your help is most welcome. Yes, we have to change all three :-)
codebases.
On 20.02.2003 08:33:31 Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long
> > licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I c
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long
licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I can
do it.
I can help you. Should we change both codebases?
--
Oleg Tkachenko
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
--
That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long
licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I can
do it.
Jeremias Maerki
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional comman
15 matches
Mail list logo