[Geany-Devel] RFC: New Custom Filetypes Repository

[Frank Lanitz]

On 20.12.2015 11:22, Lex Trotman wrote:

> "The repository" is not useful, as soon as I clone or download a
> tarball its no longer part of "the repository".

If the tarball is including a LICENCE it should be clear.

> As for PRs, anything submitted that can be reasonably understood to be
> intended to be incorporated into Geany code is also understood to be
> licensed by the Geany license for the file it is incorporated in.
> 
> But these filetypes files are whole files, that have no copyright
> notice or reference to a license.  Some useful information from the
> FSF:
> 
> "You should put a notice at the start of each source file, stating
> what license it carries, in order to avoid risk of the code's getting
> disconnected from its license. If your repository's README says that
> source file is under the GNU GPL, what happens if someone copies that
> file to another program? That other context may not show what the
> file's license is. It may appear to have some other license, or no
> license at all (which would make the code nonfree).

Yes. Best practice. If somebody is copying it and doesn't keep it under
terms of GPL he is doing a break of GPL so this is something for legal.
Theoretically.

> Adding a copyright notice and a license notice at the start of each
> source file is easy and makes such confusion unlikely.

Yes. A one liner should be enough.

> This has nothing to do with the specifics of the GNU GPL. It is true
> for any free license."
> 
> In particular note that no license means it cannot be used, not that
> it is public domain.

It depends. From my understanding in US if nobody claims Copyright, its
actually nearly PD (It's not, but feels similar to it) In Europe you
don't have to claim copyright as e.g. German Urheberrecht is having the
implicit.

> Since conf files accept comments there should be no problem with
> putting the usual header in the filetypes files, just a quick Python
> script away :)
> 
> Will look at it if I get bored soon.
> 
> As for changing the license of stuff off the wiki, unless it has a
> license that says we can do so, or we know who owns it and get their
> approval we can't legally change it.

Well... This can be hard. CC-SA is not including re-licensing IIRC.

Cheers,
Frank

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20151220/e2a33789/attachment.sig>