X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 19:36:07 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Contributing license information?
Message-ID: <20111021173607.GJ2976@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <4E4DB7AC DOT 7070702 AT cisra DOT canon DOT com DOT au> <20110819120318 DOT GB2506 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4E9F9A2A DOT 2060806 AT cisra DOT canon DOT com DOT au> <20111020073807 DOT GC23092 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4EA0D2AB DOT 30402 AT cisra DOT canon DOT com DOT au> <20111021085901 DOT GG13505 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20111021164145 DOT GA7027 AT jethro DOT local DOT lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20111021164145.GA7027@jethro.local.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Oct 21 18:41, David Sastre wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Oct 21 13:02, Luke Kendall wrote:
> > > Can I ask a related question: for the few shell scripts and /etc
> > > files provided in base-files: what license are they under?  The
> > > package contains lots of licenses, as we've been discussing, but I
> > > couldn't find any indication of which license applies to the actual
> > > non-license files in base-files itself!
> > 
> > Isn't that hard on the verge of nit-picking?  These are simple scripts.
> > Their Linux brothers and sisters are under PD so I think it makes much
> > sense to define the Cygwin files as PD, too.
> > 
> > David, that's ok with you?
> 
> Yes, it's ok for me :)
> 
> Also, it's possible to specifically mention it in the header of every
> shellscript in base-files, maybe using CC0[1][2]?
> 
> CC0 would then be included under /usr/share/doc/common-licenses.

Sounds good.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple