diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'subprojects/freeamo/src/unmaintained/sync-data/Text_templates/issue__lack_of_full_license_headers_in_each_file.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | subprojects/freeamo/src/unmaintained/sync-data/Text_templates/issue__lack_of_full_license_headers_in_each_file.txt | 78 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 78 deletions
diff --git a/subprojects/freeamo/src/unmaintained/sync-data/Text_templates/issue__lack_of_full_license_headers_in_each_file.txt b/subprojects/freeamo/src/unmaintained/sync-data/Text_templates/issue__lack_of_full_license_headers_in_each_file.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9aa890e..0000000 --- a/subprojects/freeamo/src/unmaintained/sync-data/Text_templates/issue__lack_of_full_license_headers_in_each_file.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,78 +0,0 @@ -## Lack of full license headers in each file - -There are no (full) license notices in the non-trivial source files - -The source files in FULL_SOFTWARE_NAME don't have notices saying you are the copyright -holder and/or that they are released under LICENSE LICENSE_VERSION. -I'm writing to ask you to please put a notice on each nontrivial source file. - -Selecting a license on a website that hosts the add-on (like addons.mozilla.org), will only show it there, the source files won't be modified. - -First, here's why license notices are needed. - -The purpose of a license notice is to state formally that a certain -file may be used under the terms of a particular license. - -The LICENSE, like most free software licenses, applies to whatever -material is released under that license. It does not say anything -about which programs are released that way. - -Therefore, simply including a copy of the LICENSE with some code -does not release the code under the terms of the LICENSE. -To do that, you need a license notice, which says, more or less, -"We the copyright holders release this code under the LICENSE." - -The source files should be accompanied by a copyright notice, which says who -"we" copyright holders are. That takes the form "Copyright YEAR NAME". - -For the LICENSE, there are two other reasons for a license notice: to say -which version of the LICENSE applies, and (for LICENSE LICENSE_VERSION), to say whether the -LICENSE's option of GPL compatibility applies. It is enabled by default -in LICENSE LICENSE_VERSION, but users should have an explicit statement of where things -stand for any particular code. The license notice is where you -specify this. - -Why should the license notice be on _each_ source file? -Because doing it at the package level is error-prone. - -In the free software community, it is not unusual to copy a file from -a free program into some other context. If the source file doesn't -have its own license notice, then its licensing comes from the -original context. In the other context, its licensing may not be -clear. It may not be stated at all, or it could be stated wrong. For -instance, what if the other program says, "This program is released -under Apache 2.0", or "This program is released under GNU GPL, version -3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation." - -The result would be to misinform users about the file's licensing. - -People sometimes copy part of a file, too. If the file has a license -notice, people know to preserve that notice when copying part of the -file's code. Otherwise, the licensing will probably get lost. - -A different problem can happen if you copy code _into_ FULL_SOFTWARE_NAME from -some other package. Your package-level license notice would say it is -under LICENSE LICENSE_VERSION, but what if it actually carries some other license, -such as Apache 2.0, or GPL Version 3 or later? - -Keeping a license notice in each file is the way to reliably show -users what their rights are. Please don't let uncertainty creep in. - -You've made a decision about the license -- would you please announce -it in a way that won't get forgotten? - -Other people can use your work with bad intentions, even if the mistake were honestly -unintentional. That is why, unfortunately, we have to take lots of time with verifying -the legality of everything. - -See https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.en.html for how to apply license notices. - - -# Licenseutils -* sudo apt-get install licenseutils -* Licenseutils [0.0.8 can edit .js](https://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/index.php?49441#comment24) files (see [patch](http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/licenseutils.git/commit/?id=0d365160cc0fb6d0ed5eb26cf6e762278867e653)). If you use a earlier version you need to temporary rename your .js files to .cpp (Javascript comments are the same as c++) until JS have been implemented (see [fix](https://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?49441)) and then rename them back to .js. -* Run this but with your name/copyright year/license: licensing notice -c 'Yoyodyne,\ Inc.\ 2001' -l gpl -s c -n *.cpp - -# References -These issues are compatible with the policy listed in [Free Software Directory, Requirements](https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Free_Software_Directory:Requirements). - |