| |||||||||||||
The apology line forms on the left. Please take a number.The apology line forms on the left. Please take a number.Posted Jan 18, 2013 1:05 UTC (Fri) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239)In reply to: The apology line forms on the left. Please take a number. by rcweir Parent article: A discordant symphony
Right, which means that Jon's comments about the licensing being unclear were justified. There's no way for an external developer to verify the license state. The README you keep referring to explicitly instructs the reader to refer to an unavailable document for further information. For many practical purposes, the code is not available under an open license and won't be until it's merged into AOO - and even then, if there are features you're uninterested in (either because they're too niche to be worth supporting, or duplicate other existing functionality or whatever) that code may never be available under an explicitly free license.
But ok. Let's put this another way. If I provided a patch that added a new document to the top level of the symphony svn tree, containing a list of files that the existing README implied were available under liberal terms and explicitly indicating that (barring accidental inclusion of third party code) these files could be redistributed under those terms, could that be merged?
(Log in to post comments)
The apology line forms on the left. Please take a number. Posted Jan 18, 2013 1:30 UTC (Fri) by rcweir (subscriber, #48888) [Link]
If you think you can determine what that file list is from the information provided, then that demonstrates that the list is redundant and any doubt expressed is feigned.
But if that is the root cause of your confusion, then I'll look into providing that list in Subversion.
OK?
-Rob
The apology line forms on the left. Please take a number. Posted Jan 18, 2013 1:34 UTC (Fri) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
If I can then it's an easy way for me to actually do something that I think would be helpful rather than arguing online, and if I can't then Jon was right on this point. But yes, I think supplying that list would be a great thing for you to do. Licensing clarity is always helpful.
|
|||||||||||||