[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New license wording
From: |
Mark Wielaard |
Subject: |
Re: New license wording |
Date: |
19 Jan 2002 17:43:06 +0100 |
Hi,
On Mon, 2002-01-14 at 23:15, Etienne M. Gagnon wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 01:03:25PM -0700, Richard Stallman wrote:
> >
> > It should say "not derived from or based on..."
> > I omitted the word "from".
>
> Here's the corrected text:
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Shall we go ahead with it?
OK. Since nobody objected and some people reacted positively to this and
since it is basically just a clarification of the intend of the current
license text I like to go forward with it.
I can use the same scripts that I used for the GNU Classpath AWT
relicensing. I will use it on all java and native source files in
Classpath and all the java files in the libgcj tree which have been
merged with their Classpath version. I will also change the
documentation, web files, LIBGCJ_LICENSE, etc when they mention the
license and/or exception text.
Attached is the diff to the LIBGCJ_LICENSE file and a sample diff for an
ordinary java source file.
I have already done most of this in my local tree but have to carefully
check the results by hand to make sure that I didn't make any mistakes.
When I check it in (on monday) I will post it on the address@hidden
and address@hidden lists (but omitting most of the actual
patches to the source files since they are big and boring).
Any objections or comments?
Cheers,
Mark
LIBGCJ_LICENSE.diff
Description: Text document
Externalizable.diff
Description: Text document
- New license wording, Richard Stallman, 2002/01/14
- Re: New license wording, Etienne M. Gagnon, 2002/01/14
- Re: New license wording,
Mark Wielaard <=
- Re: New license wording, Mark Wielaard, 2002/01/22
- Re: New license wording, Bryce McKinlay, 2002/01/22
- Re: New license wording, Etienne M. Gagnon, 2002/01/22
- Re: New license wording, Bryce McKinlay, 2002/01/22
- Re: New license wording, Etienne M. Gagnon, 2002/01/23