Licensing of ternary search tree code

[Russ Allbery]

"Miquel van Smoorenburg" <list-inn-workers at news.cistron.nl> writes:

> As a Debian maintainer I've dealt with this situation before.  Getting a
> BSD license on it would be great (without the advertizing clause) but
> you _do_ need a license. Even a short textfile with the date, name/email
> of the author, and the statement "this code is in the public domain"
> would suffice. A short version of that probably needs to be at the top
> of every source file as well.

I generally assume that if someone mails a patch to the list, they intend
for it to be included in INN under INN's license, but yeah, when pulling
something from somewhere else, it would be best if there were some sort of
license statement in the software package, if for no other reason than to
make downstream distributors of INN more comfortable.

Given his mail, I'd be inclined to say that you could just include that
statement in each source file, but since he's responsive it's probably
worth going another round and asking him if we can include some sort of
brief license statement in each file.

You may also want to ask him what sort of license he'd prefer the code be
listed under in the LICENSE file.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
     <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.