Sweet mercy that's a hell of a spec... In 1.0, we're not going to get to anything like this.
In 2.0 -- I can see looking into this (or something like it). Making software easy (ie, programmatically) to validate for compliance is a really valuable feature, but we're a long way from that point :D G -----Original Message----- From: coapp-developers-bounces+garretts=microsoft....@lists.launchpad.net [mailto:coapp-developers-bounces+garretts=microsoft....@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of Adam Baxter Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 2:35 PM To: Fredrik Sundqvist Cc: coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Coapp-developers] CoApp and I'd just stick with a LICENCE file in the package, and use a parser like Debian's build system does (matches common licences) This just sounds like complication for complication's sake. Interesting idea though. --Adam _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
