click-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Demetrios Kyriakis <>
Subject Re: License header overuse?
Date Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:19:08 GMT

>> But why in *.htm files?
>> Those are not "complete files" but snippets.
>> The simplicity and beauty of click just disappears and they just look 
>> ugly (no more one line files with $form in them :( ).
>> Please remove them form *.htm files - they should be considered 
>> "resources".
> Yeah if its not required we can remove it. However could you please 
> point out where Apache docs states that these files do not need the 
> header license?
Those files are "resources", i.e. they are included/parsed into the the 
(this one should have the header however).
I think the license header is not to be used where it interferes with 
the "functionality" or the "purpose" of a file. In case of a "click 
*.htm", file that license header even as "comment" clearly interferes as 
it is  the  "purpose" of click to be simple as  "$form" for the user, 
and not have 20 times the license header in that file (since there can 
be more #includes in the border template page.

> Another area where I'm not sure of is the template project. If we add 
> headers to the templates, users who create quick-start applications will 
> have the Apache license added to their projects. Not what they would 
> expect.
Template files are resources too, so should have no license headers.
Instead, a much more flexible solution would be to use an 
#include(.userdir/license_file.txt) call in them, so that users can use 
their own license(or let the  default), or when making open source 
project with it, than the default apache license would be included :).

Also I think it was  proposed a long time ago to move the entire 
"template logic" and  resources to "/click/tools/standalone/" and just 
call a task from there (together with the other already included tasks, 
  and e.g. those I send you two hours ago).

Thank you,


View raw message