Re: Overview of copyright issues

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Joseph
Wakeling<address@hidden> wrote:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> Jan and I know that the current situation wrt copyright headers and
>> license notes is not ideal, but we never could bring ourselves to fix
>> it, because there always were more important things to do.
>> Nevertheless, if someone feels energetic to take this on, they have my
>> blessing.
>
> Well, I'm happy to go fix the actual files, just not sure what the
> precise legal ramifications of this are.  I mean, if _I_ change the
> copyright notice in a file that is _your_ copyright ... :-)

Also, let's assume I am not interested in tiring myself, and that I
will not try to sue for adding gpl headers to the source.


> But anyway, I'm willing to do the typing side of it.  I just need you to
> clarify exactly what I should put: presumably GPLv2 for code files and
> GFDLv1.1 for docs are the base licenses, but would you and Jan approve
> putting GPLv2 or later for your own contributions?  What are your

Let's postpone difficult decisions, and stick with gplv2 for the
notices for now.

> thoughts (and recommendations) for code written by others?  I know that
> you ran into a paperwork issue some time back that has never been resolved.

I think having to sign paperwork (esp. having your employer sign
something) is something that puts a big barrier up for potential
contributors.  I am not sure it is worth the effort.

> I'd consider taking on the paperwork side as well (not right now, maybe
> a month or two from now) but I want to try and to as much as possible of
> what can be done without it.
>
> What I could suggest as an approval mechanism is for individual authors
> to 'sign off' the patches (as git allows) that add licensing notices to
> their files, to show that they consent to what has been put there.

Sign-off: Han-Wen Nienhuys

In general it would be good to know who reviewed what.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen