Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:21:23 +1000
From: David Crossley <crossley@apache.org>
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: missing license headers
Message-ID: <20090720142123.GA8773@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
References: <20090720070332.GC13677@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <1248090001.4662.6.camel@asf>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1248090001.4662.6.camel@asf>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i

Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > 
> > While doing the scan to ensure that our licensing is in order,
> > i found some anomalies.
> > 
> > Would the responsible committers please ensure that these
> > files are their own work. If so then please add the
> > ASF license header. If not then please indicate appropriately.
> ...
> > Also Thorsten, i added various missing licenses to some
> > Dispatcher stuff:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=795708
> 
> Thank you David I can confirm that each of these has been contributed
> with the intent to licence to the ASF.
> 
> One question: do the properties as well need a license, seeing your
> commit I say yes, but I thought that they did not (not sure why though).

It is easiest to just apply the header to everything.
That way everyone knows what they can do with any file.
Also we don't need to make decisions nor maintain extensive
exclusion lists for the license-verification tools.

-David