[ccan] iniparser re-branding

[Tim Post]

On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 12:56 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:59:35 am Tim Post wrote:
> > > My policy as CCAN maintainer is to accept code unless there's obvious license
> > > issues (even if only under junkcode/).  But I don't see the point in copying
> > > whole libraries from elsewhere.
> > 
> > The license is defined at the top of each file, it's just not
> > retrieved when someone downloads just
> > that module (with or without dependencies)
> 
> Confused...
> 1) There's no LICENSE file for ciniparser, and AFAICT never has been

Sorry, was just having my coffee when I replied. No, there was never a
LICENSE file included with the module. At the time that it was
submitted, it contained only the _info and tests.

> 2) When LICENSE symlinks were first introduced, the targets weren't in the
>    tarballs, but that was fixed.  I just checked: a random survey seems OK.

I haven't downloaded a copy since prior to that introduction. I really
should have two cups prior to answering e-mail, but that one looked
quite urgent :)


In any event, at the time I didn't think much about it, since the
license was included in the header of each file.

Sorry about the confusion!

Regards,
--Tim