#1504 closed New Feature (fixed)
License header review
Reported by: | Wiktor Walc | Owned by: | Frederico Caldeira Knabben |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | CKEditor 3.0 |
Component: | General | Version: | |
Keywords: | Confirmed V3ProtoStruct Review+ | Cc: |
Description
License info in each file takes around 700B.
700B x 30 days x 5000 hits/day x 10 file requests = 1GB/month
I have 6mbit connection so it doesn't affect me that much, but... imho that's just wasting traffic.
Shouldn't we place only a single license.txt file or at least reduce the amount of comments by placing a short link to http://www.fckeditor.net/license ?
Change History (9)
comment:1 Changed 17 years ago by
Summary: | License too long in each file? → License info too long in each file? |
---|
comment:2 Changed 17 years ago by
Keywords: | Confirmed added |
---|
comment:3 Changed 16 years ago by
Keywords: | V3ProtoStruct Discussion added |
---|---|
Milestone: | → CKEditor 3.0 |
Owner: | set to Frederico Caldeira Knabben |
Status: | new → assigned |
comment:4 Changed 16 years ago by
Summary: | License info too long in each file? → License header review |
---|
comment:5 Changed 16 years ago by
Keywords: | Review? added; Discussion removed |
---|
Ok... that's the final version for it:
/* Copyright (c) 2003-2008, CKSource - Frederico Knabben. All rights reserved. For licensing, see LICENSE.html or http://ckeditor.com/license */
comment:6 Changed 16 years ago by
Keywords: | Review+ added; Review? removed |
---|
comment:7 Changed 16 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | assigned → closed |
comment:8 follow-up: 9 Changed 16 years ago by
This is a very good approach. Should I adapt the same heading for FCKeditor.Java 2.5 and up?
comment:9 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to mosipov:
This is a very good approach. Should I adapt the same heading for FCKeditor.Java 2.5 and up?
We'll have it in the CKEditor integration for Java.
The copyright must definitely be visible in each file. All the rest is totally optional, but it is important for end users to have ways to clearly identify the license under which the code is distributed when including our code in their software.
Currently, we have the following in the CKEditor prototype branch:
What about a radical change to the following?