[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: eclipse-pydev 3.9.2 [ITP]



On 11.03.2015 04:50, tony mancill wrote:
[...]
>  I'm not 100% sure what's required here
> - we might reasonably assume that they are EPL like the rest of upstream
> - but I'd like to do a bit more digging to try to make things clear to
> the FTP team.
> 
> I'll keep working on it - just wanted to let you know why it was taking
> so long.

Hi tony,

thanks for your feedback. I think we can reasonably assume that a file
which contains no copyright header is covered by the top-level license
information in LICENSE.txt and README.txt. There is no requirement that
every file must contain the license grant. If in doubt we could also
contact upstream with the list of unknown copyright files. That should
clarify things too.

Regards,

Markus

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: