 |
 |
Hi Sebastien, I would use the Apache license but it's difficult to add exceptions to it. Specifically, we need to prohibit derivitive works that change the specification from calling it XRootD as that would just create chaos. Andy On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Sebastien Binet wrote: > Andy, > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Andrew Hanushevsky <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> Not yet. I have to discuss with the collaboration of chnaging the license >> terms for everything in he XProtocol header to be BSD. > > as far as I am concerned, they could also be licensed under MIT or Apache. > (I believe that HSF recommends the latter.) > > >> I did extract out all the binary settings and added them to the document >> but that document resides on my dead computer and I have to get an external >> drive enclosure to grab the files off the still living disk drive, sigh. >> That will hapen next week, >> > thanks for the update :) > > -s > > ######################################################################## > Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list > > To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: > https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1 > ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1