[deepamehta-devel] License Files

[Jörg Richter]

thank you, Urs, for explaining the apache process!
I feel better now.

So, I like to add a 4th proposition D) and give my opinion here:

A)	COPYING
	COPYING-de

B)	LICENSE
	LICENSE-de

C)	LICENSE.txt
	LICENSE-de.txt

D)	COPYING.txt
	COPYING-de.txt

My opinion:

A) -
B) -
C) +
D) 0

How is the decision made according to the apache process?
Proposition C) seems to be the only one with no negative (-) votings so 
far.

Cheers,
Jörg


On 24.06.2008, at 14:15, Urs Lerch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> to explain a little bit the "Apache way": if only one finds a
> proposition negative (-), then normally he can't be simply overruled by
> the masses. In this case there is always a need for further discussion.
>
> Regards,
> Urs
>
> Am Dienstag, den 24.06.2008, 14:05 +0200 schrieb Jörg Richter:
>> Hi,
>>
>> i choose option D ;-)
>>
>> 	COPYING.txt
>> 	COPYING-de.txt
>>
>> Mac OS X can't always guess the proper application to open the file
>> when double clicked. In this situation an alert box is raised which
>> leads to a very bad user experience (see screenshot). That's why all
>> files in the SVN repository have an extension. It's for the user's
>> sake!
>>
>>
>> Still I feel LICENSE the better name over COPYING because it tells
>> better what this file actually is.
>>
>> Democratic decisions is not always a good way. When ist comes to
>> Software, Mac users would always outvoted.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jörg
>>
>>
>> On 24.06.2008, at 12:28, Urs Lerch wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Jörg proposed to give the licence files modest different names. A 
>>> quick
>>> research of well known projects shows the following results:
>>>
>>>   project            name of the licence file
>>>   ----------------- ------------------------
>>>   Java (OpenJDK)    LICENSE
>>>   Linux Kernel      COPYING
>>>   GCC               COPYING
>>>   emacs             COPYING
>>>   KDE               COPYING
>>>   Gnome             COPYING
>>>   Gimp              COPYING
>>>   MySql	            COPYING
>>>   Apache            LICENCE
>>>   OpenOffice        in Sourcefiles
>>>
>>> In my opinion it is best to do it the way the other do. So my 
>>> prefered
>>> proposition for the naming of the licence files is:
>>>
>>>   A) COPYING
>>>      COPYING-de
>>>
>>> Alternate, in respect to Java, I propose:
>>>
>>>   B) LICENSE
>>>      LICENSE-de
>>>
>>> And, finally, to respect Jörgs wishes, here's my third proposition:
>>>
>>>   C) LICENSE.txt
>>>      LICENSE-de.txt
>>>
>>> I propose to do it the Apache way: For each possibility every one can
>>> tell if he's positive (+), negative (-) or indifferent (0). And at 
>>> the
>>> end we take the one with the most agreement.
>>>
>>> So my opinion is:
>>>
>>>   A) +
>>>   B) 0
>>>   C) 0
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Urs
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, den 22.06.2008, 21:10 +0200 schrieb Jörg Richter:
>>>> Hi Urs,
>>>>
>>>> thank you for adding the license files!
>>>> Your SVN operation looks OK.
>>>> Just one note:
>>>>
>>>> Pperhaps it is a good idea to rename the files:
>>>> 	licence -> LICENSE.txt
>>>> 	lizenz -> LICENSE-de.txt
>>>> This way the naming would match the README files.
>>>> Please note: I prefere "License" -- with an s --, the american 
>>>> english
>>>> form. All DeepaMehta texts are written in american english, like the
>>>> GPL3 itself.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore you are now an administrator for the Berlios bug 
>>>> tracking
>>>> and feature request tools. This means you can make changes to bug
>>>> reports and feature requests. Now you are able to close your feature
>>>> request #004180 by yourself.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your first check-in!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jörg
>> _______________________________________________
>> deepamehta-devel mailing list
>> deepamehta-devel at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/deepamehta-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> deepamehta-devel mailing list
> deepamehta-devel at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/deepamehta-devel