>>>> Stephen wrote:
Stephen> AFAIK all licenses that can be promoted to GPLv2 can also be
Stephen> promoted to GPLv3. I don't think there's anything to worry
Stephen> about except files that say they are GPLv2 and not later.
OK. I hacked a script that tries to find out what license a file is
under by looking for the "GNU General Public License as published ..."
string in the top of the files.
I also assumed that files with the extension png, xbm, and xpm can't
be examined this way so they are ignored.
Now the output is rather long so I hesitate to post it to the list
today but wait for feedback. Could this kind of script be useful?
In summary the output from the script reveals that there are 599 files
left that my script does not find the GPL text. These files needs to
be analysed one way or the other.
On the other hand the script finds 932 files that does contain the
GPLv2 text.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta