On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Dirk Stöcker <t...@dstoecker.de> wrote:
Actually it says Trac either needs to switch to Apache license or cannot > use any code from the fork. This is the opposite of what you say. > "Carrying changes back and forth will still allow the overall package to be delivered under a permissive license. It is simply that parts will be BSD and parts will be ALv2." Where does that say that Trac would need to switch to an Apache license to use code licensed under ALv2? As Felix already said, maintaining license on file level is impossible and > also would prevent structures or functions to be copied - normally patches > do not consist of singular files. Assuming the Trac project wants to take Apache Bloodhound code, why is shipping the Apache v2 license file and adding an appropriate attribution in the form of a boilerplate to any file that contains Apache licensed code 'impossible'? The Apache FAQ[1] provides a clear understanding of this to me. Perhaps you could restate exactly where the confusion is coming from? Best Wishes, Ian [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#WhatDoesItMEAN -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to trac-dev@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
