Re: Missing licenses in upstream source files

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <cate@debian.org> writes:

> Ben Finney wrote:
> 
> > Too often, though, such files are a set of license *terms* only
> > (e.g. the text of the GPL), with no copyright status or explicit
> > *grant* of license. That's not enough for Debian to know the
> > rights of recipients: mere inclusion of license terms is not a
> > grant of license under those terms.
> 
> I don't agree. Only in journals you will find copyright notice and
> author on every pages. Don't mean that there are copyright problem
> on my favorite book, in inner pages. I think it the same for
> sources. You could write the license (or a reference) on every file,
> or you could write only a general file (e.g. COPYING), if it is
> clear that the license cover all the files. This is true
> particularly for small programs. On large programs or when there are
> multiple licenses I recommend upstreams to put a copyright notice
> and license for every important file (i.e. sources and non-trivial
> header files).

Since this concurs with what I said, it seems we agree. I don't know
who you're disagreeing with, but I'm glad we're of the same opinion.

-- 
 \        “When you go in for a job interview, I think a good thing to |
  `\                  ask is if they ever press charges.” —Jack Handey |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney