KDE/kdelibs/cmake/modules

[David Faure]

On Tuesday 05 September 2006 20:05, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 September 2006 10:05, David Faure wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 September 2006 09:02, Tom Albers wrote:
> ...
> > > If it is a general discussion, we
> > > should add a COPYING-CMAKE or something to each module (similar to
> > > COPYING-DOCS which was added recently).
> >
> > I don't see why. All other source files have their license within, and
> > cmake source files can do just the same. Docs are different due to syntax
> > issues I guess.
> 
> But this means again to include the full license in every cmake script, or do 
> I misunderstand ?

"A license or a reference to the license", I meant.
After all the files under [L]GPL don't have the full text of the [L]GPL, they only refer to it.
Surely we can do the same for files under the BSD license, no?

> Once they are installed, kdelibs/license/BSD doesn't say a lot anymore, then 
> it would have to be prefix/share/licenses/BSD or something like this I think.

Well, we could use a websvn url instead then :)

> the first two lines have to fit some pattern
Ah, ok.

> > No idea about no-endorsement clause. Seems irrelevant for a project the
> > size of kde...
> 
> Why ?

Would someone really use the name of a cmake-module contributor to 
endorse or promote code that it compiles? Doesn't make sense to me.
"Microsoft Office, with contributions from Alex Neundorf in a file that
is used to compile our source code"... !?

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).