New patch series upcoming for the GUI changes

[John Goerzen]

On 01/06/2011 03:44 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:23:18PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> ---- previous discussion ----
>
>> diff --git a/offlineimap/ui/__init__.py b/offlineimap/ui/__init__.py
>> index 0206ab4..83d81c6 100644
>> --- a/offlineimap/ui/__init__.py
>> +++ b/offlineimap/ui/__init__.py
>> @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
>> -# UI module directory
>> -# Copyright (C) 2002 John Goerzen
>> -#<jgoerzen at complete.org>
>> +# UI module
>> +# Copyright (C) 2010 Sebastian Spaeth<Sebastian at SSpaeth.de>
>
> This isn't fair to remove previous Copyright statements, so I can't
> merge this patch as is.

As a special exception to what I'm about to say, I don't really care 
much about the __init__.py files as long as they're nothing but a series 
of imports.  Too low value to really fret about.

The advice we generally have from the FSF is to put a copyright 
statement into each file, along with a brief statement pointing to a 
COPYING or COPYRIGHT file.  I'm not a lawyer, so on this point I defer 
to those that are and would object to removing my copyright information 
from individual files.

It may be sensible to reduce the 3-paragraph license deal though.  In 
the words of the GPL (3) in its "How to apply these terms" section:

"To do so, attach the following notices to the program.  It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found."

When people make substantial additions to the code, it is certainly 
reasonable to add a copyright statement to the relevant files with their 
names.  If all the code I wrote is eliminated from a file, then it is of 
course reasonable to eliminate the copyright statement with my name from 
that file.

While we're on the topic, in case the question ever arises, I give my 
permission for the license of my contributions to OfflineIMAP to be 
changed from "GPL 2 or later" to "GPL 3 or later".

I don't think anybody's talking about it right now, but in case the 
question ever arises of dropping GPL 2, you've got my permission.

Does that all sound reasonable?

-- John