Re: annoying glib licencing stuff

[Mathieu Lacage <Mathieu Lacage sophia inria fr>]

I understand that this might not be high on the todo list of the gtk+
developers but I would appreciate an answer to that email.

regards,
Mathieu

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 13:57 +0200, Mathieu Lacage wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 09:49 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > The problem with making the license for the gtk and glib api docs more
> > explicit is that we currently don't have a list of contributors. Someone
> > will have to sit down with cvs annotate and produce such a list, before
> > we can contact all contributors to ask for their agreement on whatever
> > license we want to put in the docs.
> 
> Here is the list of contributors which was built out of:
>   - cvs commits in all the files contained under the docs directory by
> various cvs users who have an account.
>   - cvs log messages for all the files contained under the docs
> directory which reference some else than the commiter.
> 
> I am pretty convinced it is extremely inclusive (i.e., I am pretty sure
> I did not miss anyone) since I parsed each log at least 3 times. I
> propose to send a message to each of these people along the following
> lines. This should clear up the licensing issue. I don't really know
> what to do once this information has been gathered. Specifically, I
> thing we need to:
>   - add proper licensing information at the top of each documentation
> (glib and gobject documents) which should be a matter of copying the
> licensing statement at the start of the <bookinfo> statement.
> 
>   - add proper credit to those who contributed: it would be nice to add
> a small list somewhere in the documentation, probably another chapter at
> the end of the documentation. It would be nice if there was a way to
> ensure that these lists are maintained when a patch from someone is
> applied.
> 
>   - add copyright statements: I have no idea on how to deal with this.
> It is pretty easy with source code: the copyright statement at the top
> of each source file is maintained by the contributors themselves. Maybe
> a similar solution with xml comments at the top of each file would be a
> first step. I think the license also requires a copyright statement to
> appear next to the license statement. I have no idea what this statement
> should contain. Should it simply be a list of the copyright statements
> located at the top of each file ? I don't know. Comments are welcome.
> 
> Hi XXX,
> 
> We are trying to clear up the licensing status of the glib documentation
> and the cvs logs show that you have directly or indirectly contributed
> to this part of glib. We would appreciate if you could take a few
> minutes to answer the few questions below.
> 
> 1) Have you really contributed to the glib documentation ? If so, how
> big was that contribution ?
>   - a few typos
>   - more than a few typos
> 
> 2) If you have contributed "more than a few typos" to the glib
> documentation, we need to know who owns the copyright on your
> contribution. If you contributed this work as a part of your daytime
> payed job, then your employer most likely owns that copyright and we
> need to know who that is. Otherwise, you most likely own that copyright
> and we need to know this.
> 
> 3) If you have contributed "more than a few typos" to the glib
> documentation, we need you to confirm that the "copyright holder"
> identified in (2) has accepted the glib documentation license. A copy of
> that license is available there:
> http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/glib/docs/reference/COPYING?view=markup
> Do you confirm that your contribution follows this license ?
>   - yes
>   - no
> 
> Mathieu
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
--