On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: >> >> For the legacy Mercurial repository Andrea mentioned to be useful to >> future >> developers I would expect the copyright status of the repo to thus need >> clarifying, and I don't recall seeing a definitive statement. > > > Actually what I wrote at the beginning of this thread, months ago, was "it > is still useful since it contains important historical information": for > example, a bug might be marked as fixed in a certain CWS and I'd like to > take a look at this CWS and see whether it was integrated or not. > > So this thread is (was) mainly about preserving the code. The possibility to > include it in an OpenOffice release will likely still require to be checked > on a case-by-case basis, and was not the purpose of this thread. >
Exactly. And the reason I revived the thread was only because with the retirement of the original HG repository hosted by Oracle I've been trying to transition Ohloh to point to the BitBucket copy. That does not involve the license at all. It is merely gathering statistics on the code. Regards, -Rob > > Regards, > Andrea. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
