[Incubator] Fwd: Proposing a new OSGeo Community project: Blink Raster

[a.hagen-zanker at surrey.ac.uk]

Grand. Blink Raster has a permissive license (MIT) throughout, so no need to differentiate between tools and library.



From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com]
Sent: 16 January 2018 15:38
To: Hagen-Zanker AH Dr (Civil & Env. Eng.) <a.hagen-zanker at surrey.ac.uk>
Cc: sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com; incubator at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [Incubator] Fwd: Proposing a new OSGeo Community project: Blink Raster

That is great, for examples they are “docs” and not part of the compiled executable you ship, your can also make a note in your readme about the examples. For geotools we put examples under a permissive license so others can cut and paste them, rather than our usual LGPL for our code base.
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 7:34 AM <a.hagen-zanker at surrey.ac.uk<mailto:a.hagen-zanker at surrey.ac.uk>> wrote:
> I think we are good to help Alex set up ano next page, and will have to ask him to check file headers before I can vote +1.

Happy to do so. Does this mean making sure that every page of code has an authorship and copyright statement?

I just added copyright information to all of the test and benchmark files, the actual library already was covered.

I am not sure what to do with the example cpp files; I have written these as part of the documentation and they are designed to be as concise as possible. I would prefer not to add boilerplate to those files.

This is my copyright text in the headers;

//=======================================================================
// Copyright 2017
// Author: Alex Hagen-Zanker
// University of Surrey
//
// Distributed under the MIT Licence (http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT)
//=======================================================================
--
--
Jody Garnett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20180116/9c5ff611/attachment-0001.html>