Hi... From all the replies we got so far I don't see any legal concerns and hence I take my question/concern back.
In either way, keep the good work OpenMeetings ;) On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:52 PM, dsh <daniel.hais...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well I still opt to use Meta descriptors such as Maven POMs or CMake > (probably only applicable for native projects) files in such cases > which would allow to generate Eclipse/IDE you name it specific files > once the sources has been obtained. > > Cheers > Daniel > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:22 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 14 September 2012 13:57, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The most useful file containing the project classpath is only formatted >>> automatically, it cannot be generated without project-specific knowledge. >>> >>> There is no techical problem to drop these files, yet developers who >>> download our source release loose a useful code navigation tool without >>> these files. >> >> Unfortunately, Eclipse .classpath and .project files are *not* >> portable; the contents can depend on the individual Eclipse setup. >> In particular, unless all developers use the same default JDK as >> required by the project, the classpath files will vary. >> Also, the .project file will vary if some developers have added >> certain plugins, e.g. FindBugs or Maven. >> >> Having the files in SVN in the location where Eclipse expects to find >> them will cause problems for some developers, as they will need to >> modify the files locally in order to build. They cannot commit the >> files without causing problems for others, and so their workspace will >> always contain modifications. >> >> If you do wish to release IDE build files, I suggest you release them >> as separate files, e.g. under >> >> res/ide-support/eclipse >> res/ide-support/netbeans >> >> etc. >> >> The files can be named >> >> eclipse.classpath >> eclipse.profile >> >> as files without names can cause problems. >> >>> 14.09.2012 16:46 пользователь "Jim Jagielski" <j...@jagunet.com> написал: >>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 14, 2012, at 5:02 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>> > But can we add ASL headers to files which are defined and considered >>>> > to be, even structure wise (please correct me if I am wrong), under >>>> > the license of Eclipse ? >>>> > >>>> >>>> If they are build artifacts (like stuff created by autoconf >>>> for example), then there's no need to add AL headers (AL, not ASL). >>>> AL headers are for actual work products (like source code, etc)... >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>>> >>>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
