Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Catacomb] Re: licensing questions

On 1/4/07, Markus Litz <markus.litz@dlr.de> wrote:

As far as I know, most of the existing code is Apache 1.1 licensed. My company
would be fine with using Apache 1.1 for the new file we made.
Are there any reasons against Apache 1.1 license?

For any files that may be folded back into Apache, we should probably
use an Apache 2.0 license and hand over copyright to the ASF (which is
implicitly done when you send it as a contribution to Apache).  For
example, branches/acp-branch/dav/main/acl.c

As for methods.[ch], I don't think it's good to move around
third-party code into different files.  It makes it very difficult to
merge in upstream changes later.  Here at LimeWire, we undid the
moving of the code on our branch of catacomb in order to facilitate a
merge with the mod_dav from Apache 2.2.