Re: Unlicensed files in fakeserver & unit tests (from mailnews)

On 9/7/2009 5:38 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 06/09/09 18:26, Patrick Cloke wrote:
>> There are a few files I was looking at using some code from that are
>> part of the fakeserver code (the unit tests) in mailnews. Unfortunately
>> not all of them have a license header. I talked to Standard8 on IRC
>> yesterday and he suggested I post here.
>>
>> For example: maild.js [1] has a MPL license,
>
> Actually, to be accurate, it has an MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license.

I know it has the tri-license, but as I want to use it in an MPL project 
the LGPL/GPL part doesn't really apply.

>> but nntpd.js [2] does not
>> have a license.
>
> As a rule of thumb, you should assume all files created by Mozilla
> Project participants and checked into our SCM systems are tri-licensed
> unless they specifically say otherwise. Sometimes people forget to add
> the header.

OK. Should I add a header to these files when using them to show where 
they came from?

>> Are these files unlicensed or was the MPL header just never put on these
>> files (and nttpd.js above)? I'm hoping to use some of these files (or
>> bits of them) in an MPL project.
>
> An MPLed project or a tri-licensed project?

An MPL project.

-Patrick