Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-03 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 21:36 +, Gary Martin wrote: > FWIW: From a UI standpoint there is (some) agreement to remove the > home list view at some point and have the Journal provide information > on installed activity bundles fwiw, I agree. We could have activities as a separate icon in the devi

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-03 Thread Gary Martin
On 3 Jan 2011, at 19:21, Sameer Verma wrote: > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Gary Martin > wrote: >> On 3 Jan 2011, at 13:09, Walter Bender wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Gary Martin >> wrote: >>> >>> On 3 Jan 2011, at 02:43, Bernie Innocenti wrote: >>> On Mon, 2011-01

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-03 Thread Sameer Verma
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Gary Martin wrote: > On 3 Jan 2011, at 13:09, Walter Bender wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Gary Martin > wrote: >> >> On 3 Jan 2011, at 02:43, Bernie Innocenti wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 13:22 +1100, James Cameron wrote: >> > >> >> Unfair to

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-03 Thread Gary Martin
On 3 Jan 2011, at 13:09, Walter Bender wrote: > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Gary Martin > wrote: > On 3 Jan 2011, at 02:43, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 13:22 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > > > >> Unfair to timezone challenged. ;-} Alternatively, describe who has t

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-03 Thread Walter Bender
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Gary Martin wrote: > On 3 Jan 2011, at 02:43, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 13:22 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > > > >> Unfair to timezone challenged. ;-} Alternatively, describe who has to > >> express their view on a consensus decision. It

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Gary Martin
On 3 Jan 2011, at 02:43, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 13:22 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > >> Unfair to timezone challenged. ;-} Alternatively, describe who has to >> express their view on a consensus decision. It's not clear to me. I >> never know when a decision here has r

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 13:22 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > Unfair to timezone challenged. ;-} Alternatively, describe who has to > express their view on a consensus decision. It's not clear to me. I > never know when a decision here has reached consensus. It seems that now you have to seek app

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Walter Bender
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 12:37 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > > > The GPL does indicate the minimum text to be displayed, it is only a few > > lines, and I think that is sufficient. We have the full license > > available in the control panel.

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread James Cameron
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 12:37 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > > > The GPL does indicate the minimum text to be displayed, it is only a few > > lines, and I think that is sufficient. We have the full license > > available in the contr

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 12:37 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > The GPL does indicate the minimum text to be displayed, it is only a few > lines, and I think that is sufficient. We have the full license > available in the control panel. But do we have translations for the > minimum text? Ugh. I'm vol

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread James Cameron
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 07:58:28PM -0500, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 11:28 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > > The GPL has a section on how to apply the license to a program, and > > it describes placing a summary of the license in the source. > > I'll ask the FSF licensing lawyer

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 19:41 -0500, Walter Bender wrote: > > It may be worth considering adding an about/help menu item to the > Frame icon, just after the View Source menu item. In addition to the > license, we could include things like a link to the Activity home > page, etc. Yeah, this seems l

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 11:28 +1100, James Cameron wrote: > The GPL has a section on how to apply the license to a program, and it > describes placing a summary of the license in the source. I'll ask the FSF licensing lawyer if there's an actual legal reason to do so or if it's just excess safety.

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread James Cameron
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 07:41:49PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote: > It may be worth considering adding an about/help menu item to the > Frame icon, just after the View Source menu item. In addition to the > license, we could include things like a link to the Activity home > page, etc. I like that ide

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread Walter Bender
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 7:28 PM, James Cameron wrote: > On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:13:36PM -0500, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > > On 12/30/10 19:30, James Cameron wrote: > > > (By the way, I couldn't find a copyright or license in the code. > > > That makes any contribution ambiguous. Please add a co

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2011-01-02 Thread James Cameron
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:13:36PM -0500, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > On 12/30/10 19:30, James Cameron wrote: > > (By the way, I couldn't find a copyright or license in the code. > > That makes any contribution ambiguous. Please add a copyright and > > license so that contributions are welcomed.) >

Re: [Sugar-devel] Copyright notices

2010-12-31 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On 12/30/10 19:30, James Cameron wrote: > (By the way, I couldn't find a copyright or license in the code. That > makes any contribution ambiguous. Please add a copyright and license so > that contributions are welcomed.) While it's still common practice, there's no legal requirement for an expl