Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-05 Thread Antoine Lévy-Lambert
Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Wed, 04 Feb 2004, Antoine Lévy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Not sure exactly how it should be worded though. Do we want just to check in the above text, "the above text" being section 4 of the 1.1 license. Yes, I think so. See also

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-05 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004, Antoine Lévy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not sure exactly how it should be worded though. Do we want just to > check in the above text, "the above text" being section 4 of the 1.1 license. Yes, I think so. See also

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-04 Thread Antoine Lévy-Lambert
Stefan Bodewig wrote: Also, do we need a NOTICE file so we regain the brand protection of * 4. The names "Ant" and "Apache Software Foundation" must not be used to *endorse or promote products derived from this software without prior *written permission. For written permission, pleas

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-04 Thread Antoine Lévy-Lambert
Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Wed, 04 Feb 2004, Antoine Lévy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Main.java is the bad example bad luck, is it the only file that I should *not* check? 8-) Stefan - At least, I know that I did no

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-04 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004, Antoine Lévy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Main.java is the bad example bad luck, is it the only file that I should *not* check? 8-) Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-04 Thread Antoine Lévy-Lambert
Stefan Bodewig wrote: I've checked just a single file - Main.java and it only contained a copyright notice for 2004, you may want to check the script again. Hi Stefan, Main.java is the bad example (because I had upgraded the license there manually previously, and this was not handled properly b

Re: upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-04 Thread Stefan Bodewig
I've checked just a single file - Main.java and it only contained a copyright notice for 2004, you may want to check the script again. Also, do we need a NOTICE file so we regain the brand protection of * 4. The names "Ant" and "Apache Software Foundation" must not be used to *endorse or

upgrade to License 2.0 on head

2004-02-03 Thread Antoine Lévy-Lambert
The original message was too long. Hi. This is the qmail-send program at apache.org. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: ezmlm-reject: fatal: Sorry, I don't accept messa