Re: License

[Miguel de Icaza <miguel helixcode com>]

> 1) None of the header files claim any copyright at all, this is a
>    serious bug.

Oh?  I did not know we had to do this.  The Linux kernel does not do
this either.

> 2) None of the copyright notices in the C files state the license. I
>    guess you could assume the overall license applies, but what if
>    someone decides that the executables like Bonobrowser, etc, should
>    be GPL, or the sample code should be under a license even more
>    liberal than LGPL? Or what if someone cut-n-pastes a whole file
>    from Bonobo to another project? It's really best to be explicit on
>    a file by file basis.

We should document this precisely.

I would not object to add one or two lines to the .c files that say:

	(C) SomeDude.
	This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU XXX PL, read
	COPYING.??? for details.

But the full 11 lines make the header completely useless for quick
perusal.

> 5) If you still don't like the full top of file comments, how about
>    just adding a statement that the license is LGPL, and where to get
>    a copy of the LGPL.

That sounds perfect.  I have not a strong objection to not adding the
full text to all the files in GNOME/Bonobo/etc if there is a real
legal threat to the code.

Does anyone have more details on this?  And I remember Linus not
putting the whole (C) thing for some reason or another.

Miguel.