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 ... :-) 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 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'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. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
