httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dirk-Willem van Gulik <>
Subject Re: License text in source
Date Tue, 14 Mar 2000 10:26:54 GMT

Greg Stein wrote:

> Why are we saying that "only" the license committee can talk about this
> stuff? That seems a bit contrary to normal operation... I can agree that
> some discussions can move faster with a small group, but it does seem a
> bit wrong to try to censor the discussion here.

Sorry. You are quite right. Lets continue here.

> ** By using this file, you agree to the terms and conditions set forth in
> ** the LICENSE.html file which can be found at the top level of the mod_dav
> ** distribution or at
> In the future, if I ever update the license, I'd switch to -2 and tweak
> all of the filse (an easy change). The above text is also pretty clear
> that the file is subject to a license (much like how GNU handles it).

I'd still be very, very wary for having a URL there which a) requires
web access and b) thus not makes the licence come with the package. In
any case if you specify a URL you must at least specify a way of getting
the licence by surface mail; i.e. from some permanent address. We do
not really have this (yet). References are such a pain!

To me a licence you agree to at a certain moment in time; when you
accept the package, or even a single file, needs to be part of that package
As you _will_ find that people reuse part of it for other things. I do
this all the time; things like 'ab' or the table stuff are usefull in
many a setting; so is APR. Just lifting files should be easy and secure
and should not require much efford on the person ripping it off. 

Hence putting a header in is a very small price to pay; 4% extra in
the distribution and a few perl -pi hacks.

The arguments I've seen sofar for doing this are:

a)	Ryan hates to change the licence blurp each and every time

IMHO we are 1) not going to do this often and 2) perl is your friend!
	and 3) I'll promise to do it.

b)	It bloats the package.

IMHO - GZIP takes care of that very nicely:

	As currently	1.47 Mbyte		(1.471.120)
	Without 		1.44 Mbyte		(1.438.254)
	------------------------------------------ -
			     32k			(32.866 bytes)
	or about	     4%

	This email is propably larger :-)
c)	It is anoying to skip over each time

IMHO use emacs or vim :-)

s)	The GNU licence does not do it.

IMHO 1) the gnu licence can do what it wants and 2) it does put in a 1201
char chunk of blurp which weights in at about half the size of our licence
which is carefull to leave a persistent pointer.


View raw message