[Cython] License information on each individual files

[Robert Bradshaw]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Robert Bradshaw <robertwb at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Benjamin Lerman <qsr at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>  Would cython accept to add such a copyright header on its files?
>>> >
>>> > You want to display the Apache licence in every single file, even those
>>> > with utility C code?
>>>
>>> It's annoying, but a pretty standard request. Debian once made me do
>>> this for some package or another (forget which) before they would
>>> distribute it, though obviously that rule is inconsistently applied.
>>> Still, it's pretty trivial and has real-world consequences, so why
>>> reject a patch like this?
>>
>>
>> Debian currently distributes Cython without these headers.
>>
>
> Yes, they're inconsistent, as I noted.
>
>
>>
>> I am curious why a licence in a top level directory that explicitly
>> states it applies to everything in that directory is not sufficiently
>> clear. What about auto-generated files? What about binary blobs? All 1000+
>> test files?
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#copy-per-file
>>
>
> That link is about sticking a copy of the apache license text in every
> file, this is about having a few line header saying "This is part of
> Cython, copyright Cython devs, released under Apache-2, see LICENSE.txt for
> details".
>
> I'm just saying, you can argue about how chromium's lawyers ought to
> think, or you can just say "whatever, patches welcome" and merge it if it
> arrives. Your time is yours to spend as you wish :-) I was also very
> annoyed initially when asked to do this, so thought I'd share my experience
> in case it was useful.
>

It's not just the initial patch; I'm primarily worried about the
maintenance burden. For example, either we require (and enforce) it on all
new files or you get into this inconsistent state where some files have a
statement and some don't, and it's unclear what the copyright implications
of this inconsistency is. And that's assuming we don't have to mess with
years, author lists, etc. (not clear what the request was).

There's plenty of precedent for not tagging every file (e.g. the linux
kernel).

- Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/cython-devel/attachments/20140718/264cc133/attachment.html>