Paul TBBle Hampson wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 07:03:53PM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote: >> I've only had time to have a look at slviewer. It bothers me a bit that some >> files do not include a license, we should have to try to findo out where do >> they come from and under which license they can be distributed. Usually, for >> most of the countries, no license means no rights at all. > > I'm pretty sure there's an upstream bug report about this too, I dunno > what kind of state it's in though. I haven't looked at their public > issue tracker for months. There was a massive change from 1.18.3.5.X to 1.18.4.X which added headers to all the cpp and h files . I still have not checked if they got all of them. > > I haven't actually looked at Robin's packages myself, but I had kind of > hoped he'd* dragged that sort of stuff across from my packaging into > his. I've kept all the packaging the same I've only updated the upstream version and rebased the patches. Your header_audit.pl is still there. I have not checked through all the viewer files, but the cpp and h files seem ok now, i could be wrong as there are so many. Its other files that don't have any licence header at all. Regards Robin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature