On 11/24/2011 02:26 PM, Francesco Vollero wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 01:08:53PM +0100, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
> On 11/23/2011 07:44 PM, Francesco Vollero wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just added/changed the license for conductor moving the code from GPL to ASL
and, including the ASL license on files that does not contain it.
>> The patch can be found here:
http://razorinc.org/0001-Added-changed-license-from-GPL-to-ASL.patch
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Francesco Vollero
>
> Hi Francesco,
>
> Thanks for looking into this, we do need to sort the licensing out.
>
> A couple of notes:
>
> 1) The patch removes *all* Conductor routes and replaces them with a
> file containing the license header only.
>
Thanks for your feedback, just discovered that this file was modified with my old version
of the script, revert back the file show that
work without problems.
> 2) The `COPYING` file should be updated to contain the full text of
> the new license (with this patch it still contains GPLv2).
>
Yes, i thought that this operation need to be multistage, so first i started fixing just
our files. (The redmine task was for that) but thanks, i think we can
sort out all the changes for license in one shoot.
Oh, I didn't realize that. I certainly don't think we need to put it all
in one patch or in one go.
> 3) Did you go through all the libraries that we're using and check
> they're ASL v. 2.0 compatible?
>
> GPLv2 isn't, for example. Couple of weeks back I went through all
> the JavaScript libraries we're using and their licensing is okay
> with the change.
>
> But we need to check all the gems and other libraries we may depend
> on. If any are GPLv2 (or under any other incompatible license), we
> need to replace them if we want to have our code under ASL.
>
Good catch mate :) I've to say that i didn't check the compatibility because i
thought that GPL and ASL was compatible, but just from v3, so this is another task to be
added to Redmine.
> 4) I was hoping that as we're changing the licences anyway, we may
> use that occasion to get rid of twentysomething-line blob of
> legalese on top of every file.
>
> I think it would be much better to mention the license in README and
> then have something like this on top of every file:
>
> # Licensed under Apache Software License 2.0. See the README and
> COPYING files
>
I was hoping so as well, but seems that this license have to be added in every file in
the way it is now :( But I'll keep search for more informations.
I didn't know you had to do that. But reading the license appendix it
seems that you're right. That's just silly -- why can't we apply the
license to the entire project instead of individual files?
<sigh>
> Thanks again for doing this. I can give you a hand if you want to.
>
Definitely! Thanks Tomas :)
Francesco