On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Joseph Wakeling<joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote: > The other part is that there are some aspects of the way Lilypond code > and docs are managed with respect to licensing that are confusing or > problematic -- lack of licensing notices in source code, lack of > copyright or licensing notices in docs. Those really should be fixed > and better practices established for maintaining them. I would see that > as pretty urgent actually, far more important than the 'what license?' > question, because it relates to LP's ability to track who wrote what and > which conditions they made it available under.
Jan and I know that the current situation wrt copyright headers and license notes is not ideal, but we never could bring ourselves to fix it, because there always were more important things to do. Nevertheless, if someone feels energetic to take this on, they have my blessing. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
