[Proj] Method of reference to license within software code modules
proj at cwilson.fastmail.fm
Mon Jan 5 22:12:43 EST 2009
Gerald I. Evenden wrote:
> On Monday 05 January 2009 8:16:14 pm Charles Wilson wrote:
>> The usual practice is yes, when the license itself is short (20-30
>> lines). So, MIT license, BSD, usually yes.
> I cannot find a reference to that line 20-30 count---but I nit-pick. Their
> example that references the COPYING file is about 15 lines. The MIT is about
> 27 lines.
Right -- it just seems /to me/ to be the usual practice: most open
source softwares seem to embed MIT (27 lines) and BSD-[any flavor]
(anywhere from 21 to 28 lines) in every file.
The FSF gives specific guidance on how to deal with the GPL's mammoth
length, and recommends putting *something* in every source file (which
is 20 lines).
As a contrary data point, the entire zlib/libpng license is 20 lines,
but the zlib source code includes only a 3-line header in each file:
/* crc32.c -- compute the CRC-32 of a data stream
* Copyright (C) 1995-2005 Mark Adler
* For conditions of distribution and use, see copyright notice in
And nobody has complained yet that it isn't legal.
>>> Anyway, I feel that I have been a bit excessive.
>> Nope, I think you did it just right.
> Over a third of what I distribute is nothing but repeated license.
Well, the good news is compression formats' bread and butter is
eliminating redundant text. Hence, .tar.gz/.tar.bz2/.tar.lzma/.zip
files probably won't grow or shrink much at all whatever you do to the
license banner in each file.
There's probably a certain amount of overhead associated with direct svn
downloads -- but updates are communicated by delta, so it's probably not
a big deal there, either.
Dealer's choice, really.
More information about the Proj