Re: FTP classes question

[David Sugar]

The reason is simply that it was not deamed ready for general release yet.
The biggest issue is how to make that particular implimentation work well
within the URLStream class and to make it more consistent with other
classes, especially in light of the "2" coding standards.  The licensing
issue is small and one that I believe could most likely be resolved very
quickly with the contributor.  I think it's a good implimentation and
needs just a bit of work to make it fit well.

David

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Pavel Tsekov wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I see that the implementation of the classes declared in
> include/cc++/ftp.h are missing from the source tarball for
> the CommonC++ 2 v0.99.1 release. Is this intended or the source file
> just slipped away while the tarball was built ? Does this have something to
> do with licensing ? I see that ftp.h has a different license from that
> of the other CommonC++ files. Are the ftp.h and ftp.cpp files subject to
> different licensing schemes than most of the CommonC++ classes i.e.
> GPL vs GPL + CommonC++ exception ?
>
> Thanks! :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
>