Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory?

[David Hedlund]

Thank you John. But the programs must be distributed with a copy of the
license in the root directory, right? Adblock Plus
(https://issues.adblockplus.org/ticket/6765) and NoScript (emailed the
developer about
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/file/972162/noscript_security_suite-10.1.8.2-an+fx.xpi)
doesn't have a license copy in the root directory. So should I unapprove
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Adblock_Plus and
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/IceCat/NoScript ?


On 2018-06-25 17:03, John Sullivan wrote:
> David, the program in question also has  a statement of intent in its README 
> licensing the project under the AGPL. So this is different than the situation 
> your message addresses, where the only indication of license is a copy of the 
> license file. 
>
> So, this is okay for the FSD, but yes it is still most certainly good to ask 
> projects to also add per file license headers. It's the best practice.
>