[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[task #16238] Submission of Fidei - Take back your faith
From: |
Ineiev |
Subject: |
[task #16238] Submission of Fidei - Take back your faith |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Sep 2022 15:01:29 -0400 (EDT) |
Follow-up Comment #5, task #16238 (project administration):
[comment #4 comment #4:]
>
> The thing with the CC-BY-SA-4.0 is, that AppStream requires the metadata to
be licensed under a few specific licenses[0], AGPL-3.0 not being one of them.
I'm out of context. AppStream is a free software, isn't it? Then one can
modify that function to include any strings needed.
> The page you linked doesn't really specify how to handle such a "dual
licensing" case.
You have to understand what the licenses you use imply and how they combine.
For more info, you can check the [//www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html GPL FAQ]
and the [//www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html GNU License List].
> All files that carry "This file is distributed under the same license as
Fidei" end up inside the binary (via GResource), so I'd like to avoid having
the same half a kilobyte of license header a bunch of times in the compiled
binary. Is there an alternative shorter form of the AGPL-3.0 license header I
could use instead?
Comments in source code shouldn't affect the size of the executable; if they
do and the size is important, then you should reconsider your building
process. The developer shouldn't compromise between source code readability
and the efficiency of the translated binary.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16238>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.nongnu.org/