Hi, I just ran the tool on the Wicket 1.2.2 distribution, just to see how we stack up and how much we need to change our release.
I came up with some questions when I read report that came out of the tool, and would like to see what the policy is on these matters. - the tool flags all HTML documents, even generated JavaDoc. Should we not provide the javadoc in our distribution? - our framework has some HTML markup, properties, CSS and JS javascript files that are part of the product. - our source directories have the package.html javadoc file - the source files for our generated documentation are part of the distribution, so people that download the distribution can build the whole distribution themselves. This contains xml, fml (maven faq document), and txt files (apt). Especially the apt format doesn't work together with comments. My question is, should all these files get the ASL headers? This would be a hard hit for the embedded JavaScript, CSS and HTML files. These will be served to clients using the Wicket framework, and the header will add to their download size. Is there an Apache policy for these files? I took the liberty of looking at the Struts 2 release, and they don't have license headers in the aforementioned files. Martijn -- <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket";>Vote</a> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket";>Wicket</a> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in the World!</a> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
