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

Re: RFS: polygraph



On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:27:36 -0600, Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com> wrote:
> On 04/03/2011 03:36 PM, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> 
> >> /* Web Polygraph       http://www.web-polygraph.org/
> >>  * (C) 2003-2006 The Measurement Factory
> >>  * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 */
> 
> > Here you are in fact certainly lacking sufficient information, because (C) is
> > not generally equivalent to "Copyright" under all copyright laws. 
> 
> We will change "(C)" to "Copyright".
> 
> 
> On 04/03/2011 03:52 PM, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> > I have looked at licensecheck. It matches the following regexp:
> >
> >   /under the Apache License, Version ([^ ]+) \(the License\)/
> >
> > Changing "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" line to
> > "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the License)" makes
> > licensecheck detect both license and copyright correctly. IMO the
> > licensecheck regexp should be improved.
> 
> I do not know whether licensecheck does some relevant preprocessing, but
> the above regex would not even match the recommended raw preamble
> because the recommended preamble quotes the second License:
> 
> > Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> 

Apparently, it does. Because the recommended preamble is recognized.

> Since the stuff in parenthesis is meant for the following text which may
> not be present in many customized preambles, it should not be matched
> for, IMHO,
> 

Agreed. I openned a bug for devscripts #620902 [1].

Regards,
  Dmitry

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620902

> Cheers,
> 
> Alex.


Reply to: