[Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]

Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.

I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL license.



Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source file. This is what is recommended by
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.

To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]


Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>

# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34


Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
Office: +41 21 619 10 10

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero
I see perfect to reduce the overhead of the headers, because it's a nonsense, so I would say option b, but a recurring conflicting issue is about the copyright: this part doesn't reflect at all the reality of the code because:
  • People copy/paste from Odoo code and let Odoo copyright, which is not correct.
  • Author put its copyright, but contributors (that can exceed the LOC contributed from the author), doesn't remember to put its name in it.
  • BTW, it's very tedious to maintain this section for each file.
Why don't we just simply remove it? Copyright can be deduced from Git history. I know that FSF recommends to put it, but it's that, only a recommendation, not a must for AGPL.

Regards.

2015-01-05 12:09 GMT+01:00 Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]>:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]

Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.

I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL license.



Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source file. This is what is recommended by
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.

To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]


Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>

# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34


Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Alejandro Santana
I put authorship, contributors and copyright info only in __openerp__.py.

On other .py files I just use:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
################################################################
#    License, author and contributors information in:          #
#    __openerp__.py file at the root folder of this module.    #
################################################################

Just my 2 cents.


--
Alejandro Santana
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

ANUBÍA, soluciones en la nube, S.L.

Plaza Fernando Conde Montero Ríos, 9
36201, Vigo (Pontevedra)

www.anubia.es


anubía_logo_2014_i_o_140x140.pngodoo_logo_odoo_ready_140x140.png



2015-01-05 13:38 GMT+01:00 Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <[hidden email]>:
I see perfect to reduce the overhead of the headers, because it's a nonsense, so I would say option b, but a recurring conflicting issue is about the copyright: this part doesn't reflect at all the reality of the code because:
  • People copy/paste from Odoo code and let Odoo copyright, which is not correct.
  • Author put its copyright, but contributors (that can exceed the LOC contributed from the author), doesn't remember to put its name in it.
  • BTW, it's very tedious to maintain this section for each file.
Why don't we just simply remove it? Copyright can be deduced from Git history. I know that FSF recommends to put it, but it's that, only a recommendation, not a must for AGPL.

Regards.

2015-01-05 12:09 GMT+01:00 Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]>:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]

Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.

I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL license.



Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source file. This is what is recommended by
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.

To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]


Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>

# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34


Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Lionel Sausin
In reply to this post by Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp
Le 05/01/2015 12:09, Yannick Vaucher a écrit :
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal)
I think this is the simplest option. I'd even drop line 2 "# Author: <author name>".
We should also not put the licence in __openerp__.py but rather in a single file named "LICENCE" at the root of each project, this is where those interested will look first.
Lionel Sausin

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Sandy Carter (http://www.savoirfairelinux.com)
In reply to this post by Alejandro Santana
Avoid the # box, I find it very irking to have that many heavy
characters like that.

Besides: E265 block comment should start with '# ' (single space after
the first hash).

How about:

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
#
# License, author and contributors information in:
# __openerp__.py file at the root folder of this repository.
#


Le 2015-01-05 07:53, Alejandro Santana a écrit :

> I put authorship, contributors and copyright info only in __openerp__.py.
>
> On other .py files I just use:
> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
> ################################################################
> #    License, author and contributors information in:          #
> #    __openerp__.py file at the root folder of this module.    #
> ################################################################
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
>
> --
> *Alejandro Santana*
> [hidden email]
> · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
>
> ANUBÍA, soluciones en la nube, S.L.
>
> Plaza Fernando Conde Montero Ríos, 9
> 36201, Vigo (Pontevedra)
>
> www.anubia.es
>
> [image: anubía_logo_2014_i_o_140x140.png][image:
> odoo_logo_odoo_ready_140x140.png] <http://www.anubia.es/>
>
>
>
> 2015-01-05 13:38 GMT+01:00 Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <[hidden email]>
> :
>
>> I see perfect to reduce the overhead of the headers, because it's a
>> nonsense, so I would say option b, but a recurring conflicting issue is
>> about the copyright: this part doesn't reflect at all the reality of the
>> code because:
>>
>>    - People copy/paste from Odoo code and let Odoo copyright, which is
>>    not correct.
>>    - Author put its copyright, but contributors (that can exceed the LOC
>>    contributed from the author), doesn't remember to put its name in it.
>>    - BTW, it's very tedious to maintain this section for each file.
>>
>> Why don't we just simply remove it? Copyright can be deduced from Git
>> history. I know that FSF recommends to put it, but it's that, only a
>> recommendation, not a must for AGPL.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> 2015-01-05 12:09 GMT+01:00 Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]
>>> :
>>
>>> Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the
>>> size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license
>>> from source files. [1]
>>>
>>> Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few
>>> lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.
>>>
>>> I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL
>>> license.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source
>>> file. This is what is recommended by
>>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html
>>>
>>> To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think
>>> a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the
>>> one who opens the file.
>>>
>>> To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept
>>> minimal header with license like this
>>>
>>> # Copyright 2015 <author>
>>> # <notice where to find full licence>
>>>
>>> (with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
>>> Exemple here [2]
>>>
>>>
>>> Our options:
>>> a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
>>>
>>> b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly
>>> taken from David Beal's proposal):
>>>
>>> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
>>> # Author: <author name>
>>> # Copyright 2015 <company or author>
>>> # License AGPL version 3 or later
>>> # See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] More talks about it in:
>>> https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34
>>>
>>> [2] An exemple of minimal license:
>>> https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Yannick Vaucher
>>> Business Solutions Software Developer
>>>
>>> Camptocamp SA
>>> PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
>>> Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
>>> Office: +41 21 619 10 10
>>> http://www.camptocamp.com/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> Post to     : [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> Post to     : [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

signature.asc (484 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Alejandro Santana

Avoiding heavy characters case is perfectly fine, better indeed and less stress for the eyes.

Alejandro Santana
[hidden email]
~
ANUBÍA, soluciones en la nube, S.L.
www.anubia.es
   

El 5/1/2015 15:59, "Sandy Carter" <[hidden email]> escribió:
Avoid the # box, I find it very irking to have that many heavy
characters like that.

Besides: E265 block comment should start with '# ' (single space after
the first hash).

How about:

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
#
# License, author and contributors information in:
# __openerp__.py file at the root folder of this repository.
#


Le 2015-01-05 07:53, Alejandro Santana a écrit :
> I put authorship, contributors and copyright info only in __openerp__.py.
>
> On other .py files I just use:
> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
> ################################################################
> #    License, author and contributors information in:          #
> #    __openerp__.py file at the root folder of this module.    #
> ################################################################
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
>
> --
> *Alejandro Santana*
> [hidden email]
> · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
>
> ANUBÍA, soluciones en la nube, S.L.
>
> Plaza Fernando Conde Montero Ríos, 9
> 36201, Vigo (Pontevedra)
>
> www.anubia.es
>
> [image: anubía_logo_2014_i_o_140x140.png][image:
> odoo_logo_odoo_ready_140x140.png] <http://www.anubia.es/>
>
>
>
> 2015-01-05 13:38 GMT+01:00 Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <[hidden email]>
> :
>
>> I see perfect to reduce the overhead of the headers, because it's a
>> nonsense, so I would say option b, but a recurring conflicting issue is
>> about the copyright: this part doesn't reflect at all the reality of the
>> code because:
>>
>>    - People copy/paste from Odoo code and let Odoo copyright, which is
>>    not correct.
>>    - Author put its copyright, but contributors (that can exceed the LOC
>>    contributed from the author), doesn't remember to put its name in it.
>>    - BTW, it's very tedious to maintain this section for each file.
>>
>> Why don't we just simply remove it? Copyright can be deduced from Git
>> history. I know that FSF recommends to put it, but it's that, only a
>> recommendation, not a must for AGPL.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> 2015-01-05 12:09 GMT+01:00 Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]
>>> :
>>
>>> Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the
>>> size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license
>>> from source files. [1]
>>>
>>> Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few
>>> lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.
>>>
>>> I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL
>>> license.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source
>>> file. This is what is recommended by
>>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html
>>>
>>> To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think
>>> a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the
>>> one who opens the file.
>>>
>>> To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept
>>> minimal header with license like this
>>>
>>> # Copyright 2015 <author>
>>> # <notice where to find full licence>
>>>
>>> (with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
>>> Exemple here [2]
>>>
>>>
>>> Our options:
>>> a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
>>>
>>> b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly
>>> taken from David Beal's proposal):
>>>
>>> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
>>> # Author: <author name>
>>> # Copyright 2015 <company or author>
>>> # License AGPL version 3 or later
>>> # See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] More talks about it in:
>>> https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34
>>>
>>> [2] An exemple of minimal license:
>>> https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Yannick Vaucher
>>> Business Solutions Software Developer
>>>
>>> Camptocamp SA
>>> PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
>>> Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030">+41 21 619 10 30
>>> Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010">+41 21 619 10 10
>>> http://www.camptocamp.com/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> Post to     : [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> Post to     : [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Leonardo "LeartS" Donelli
I agree with Pedro. Copyright notices are bad/useless

 - Often outdated and incorrect (because copy pasted without
modifications, for example)
 - Don't (can't) reflect the complicated situation of OCA modules
autorship/contributions
 - useless from a legal point (see:
http://hackerboss.com/get-rid-of-templates/), copyright is implied by
autorship (which is better determined using git) and does not need to
be explicitly declared.

Regarding the LICENSE, despite what the FSF says, I think than putting
it in a LICENSE file is enough for all practical and theoretical
purposes. Just look at some big open source projects source code.

A nice read: http://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2012/ManagingCopyrightInformation.html

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Paul Catinean
Also agree to option b. Not to mention that if there should be an update to license it must be done in each and every .py file which is kind of nonsense and very impractical

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Leonardo "LeartS" Donelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
I agree with Pedro. Copyright notices are bad/useless

 - Often outdated and incorrect (because copy pasted without
modifications, for example)
 - Don't (can't) reflect the complicated situation of OCA modules
autorship/contributions
 - useless from a legal point (see:
http://hackerboss.com/get-rid-of-templates/), copyright is implied by
autorship (which is better determined using git) and does not need to
be explicitly declared.

Regarding the LICENSE, despite what the FSF says, I think than putting
it in a LICENSE file is enough for all practical and theoretical
purposes. Just look at some big open source projects source code.

A nice read: http://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2012/ManagingCopyrightInformation.html

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Markus Schneider
I think you see it not so simple. The basic shipment unit of code is
always a file. Not a module nor a git repositories.
And if you can have modules with libs include with other license you
want pretty see the kind of each class.
So we don't need not to reinvent the wheel. Just stick to GNU best
practice. In practice not all author are listed only initial author and
ongoing maintainer.

Having correct header seems sometimes annoying but all this license
stuff keeps our rights.
So i prefer, to be more patient that contributing only with right
headers are merged and we stick on best practice. Maybe we have a
template witch is already PEP8 compatible.

Kind Regards
Markus

On 05.01.2015 16:29, Paul Catinean wrote:

> Also agree to option b. Not to mention that if there should be an update
> to license it must be done in each and every .py file which is kind of
> nonsense and very impractical
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Leonardo "LeartS" Donelli
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     I agree with Pedro. Copyright notices are bad/useless
>
>      - Often outdated and incorrect (because copy pasted without
>     modifications, for example)
>      - Don't (can't) reflect the complicated situation of OCA modules
>     autorship/contributions
>      - useless from a legal point (see:
>     http://hackerboss.com/get-rid-of-templates/), copyright is implied by
>     autorship (which is better determined using git) and does not need to
>     be explicitly declared.
>
>     Regarding the LICENSE, despite what the FSF says, I think than putting
>     it in a LICENSE file is enough for all practical and theoretical
>     purposes. Just look at some big open source projects source code.
>
>     A nice read:
>     http://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2012/ManagingCopyrightInformation.html
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>     Post to     : [hidden email]
>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

--
Dipl.-Comp.-Math. Markus Schneider
Softwareentwickler

initOS GmbH & Co. KG
An der Eisenbahn 1
21224 Rosengarten

Mobil:   +49 (0)172 2303699
Phone:   +49 (0)4105 5615613
Fax:     +49 (0)4105 5615610

Email:   [hidden email]
Web:     http://www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dipl. Wirt.-Inf. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke
Haftende Gesellschafterin: initOS Verwaltungs GmbH

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Rosengarten – Klecken
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRA 201840
USt-IdNr: DE 275698169
Steuer-Nr: 15/205/21402

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Jerry Van Baren-2
In reply to this post by Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp
On 01/05/2015 06:09 AM, Yannick Vaucher wrote:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]
[snip]
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.
Suggestion: switch to the SPDX notation on as the license note in the header of the files. This achieves minimal footprint in a machine and human recognizable format using a standard format (for some definition of standard).

Random(ish) example: cmd_fdt.c

References:
To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]
Agreed, but I would use the SPDX notation in the header to make it standard(ish) and scannable.

Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34

[2] An exemple of minimal license:
https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files

Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
Office: +41 21 619 10 10


Best regards,
gvb

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp
This is a good idea to follow some standard.

However, SPDX meta tag "SPDX-License-Identifier" is not yet widely used.

It seems that it was firstly used by U-boot project
https://github.com/linux-sunxi/u-boot-sunxi/commit/1a4596601fd395f3afb8f82f3f840c5e00bdd57a

AFAICT it is still under draft proposal:
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Technical_Team/SPDX_Meta_Tags
http://www.fossology.org/issues/6051

So the idea is good to try to comply with SPDX, and if we agree with this early adoption, then here would be the new header:

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3
# For license see __openerp__.py or http://spdx.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0
With author and contributors in __openerp__.py

And I'm not sure about what to put or not in __openerp__.py and weither or not we should keep the pointer to __openerp__.py
Nevertheless, as our modules can be downloaded from apps.odoo.com, and thus it wouldn't include root LICENSE file, we do need to keep __openerp__.py as it or to include LICENSE file at module level.


Cheers,


Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
Office: +41 21 619 10 10

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Jerry Van Baren <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 01/05/2015 06:09 AM, Yannick Vaucher wrote:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]
[snip]
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.
Suggestion: switch to the SPDX notation on as the license note in the header of the files. This achieves minimal footprint in a machine and human recognizable format using a standard format (for some definition of standard).

Random(ish) example: cmd_fdt.c

References:
To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]
Agreed, but I would use the SPDX notation in the header to make it standard(ish) and scannable.

Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34

[2] An exemple of minimal license:
https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files

Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10


Best regards,
gvb

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Alejandro Santana
Hi,

Yannick's proposal remains quite minimal and seems compliable with some "standard".
But, does it need to contain the copyright info? That is the main point that keeps hard to maintain: every file with copyright and authorship (and its related issues like collaborations).

So, could this:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3
# For license see __openerp__.py or http://spdx.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0
turn into this?:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3
# For authorship and license see:
# __openerp__.py and http://spdx.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0

Regarding the license and authorship details:
- LICENSE file would include authorship? Or just a LICENSE copy? Otherwise there should be an AUTHOR file to cover authorship (author and contributors)
- This LICENSE file... which format should be. I guess plain text (therefore no .rst, no .md).
- Does Odoo has any opinion on this? So far, as mentioned, these things have to remain in __openerp__.py to be available for apps.odoo.com (and even so, collaborations are not covered).








--
Alejandro Santana
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

ANUBÍA, soluciones en la nube, S.L.

Plaza Fernando Conde Montero Ríos, 9
36201, Vigo (Pontevedra)

www.anubia.es


anubía_logo_2014_i_o_140x140.pngodoo_logo_odoo_ready_140x140.png



2015-01-08 11:46 GMT+01:00 Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]>:
This is a good idea to follow some standard.

However, SPDX meta tag "SPDX-License-Identifier" is not yet widely used.

It seems that it was firstly used by U-boot project
https://github.com/linux-sunxi/u-boot-sunxi/commit/1a4596601fd395f3afb8f82f3f840c5e00bdd57a

AFAICT it is still under draft proposal:
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Technical_Team/SPDX_Meta_Tags
http://www.fossology.org/issues/6051

So the idea is good to try to comply with SPDX, and if we agree with this early adoption, then here would be the new header:

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3
# For license see __openerp__.py or http://spdx.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0
With author and contributors in __openerp__.py

And I'm not sure about what to put or not in __openerp__.py and weither or not we should keep the pointer to __openerp__.py
Nevertheless, as our modules can be downloaded from apps.odoo.com, and thus it wouldn't include root LICENSE file, we do need to keep __openerp__.py as it or to include LICENSE file at module level.


Cheers,


Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Jerry Van Baren <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 01/05/2015 06:09 AM, Yannick Vaucher wrote:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]
[snip]
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.
Suggestion: switch to the SPDX notation on as the license note in the header of the files. This achieves minimal footprint in a machine and human recognizable format using a standard format (for some definition of standard).

Random(ish) example: cmd_fdt.c

References:
To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]
Agreed, but I would use the SPDX notation in the header to make it standard(ish) and scannable.

Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>
# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt



[1] More talks about it in:
https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34

[2] An exemple of minimal license:
https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files

Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10


Best regards,
gvb

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Lionel Sausin
As far as I know, copyright is implicitly granted to authors almost
everywhere in the world, so writing the (c) in every file is useless.
Authors can simply use git to prove their rights whenever they need to.
Lionel Sausin.

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Ovnicraft
In reply to this post by Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Yannick Vaucher <[hidden email]> wrote:
Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing redundant license from source files. [1]

Moreover, when writing a module you often have py files with only few lines, thus the header takes a lot of place.

I think it is time to write down what we can and cannot do about AGPL license.



Actual common use is to attach the full header at start of each source file. This is what is recommended by
To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to be read by the one who opens the file.

To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also accept minimal header with license like this
# Copyright 2015 <author>
# <notice where to find full licence>
(with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
Exemple here [2]


Our options:
a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
 
b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# Author: <author name>
# Copyright 2015 <company or author>

# License AGPL version 3 or later
# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt

Here we can do it better, there are some guides about this:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-


__author__
= "Full Name(email)"
__copyright__
= "Copyright (C) YEAR FULL NAME"
__license__
= "AGPL 3.0"
__version__
= "1.0"

So in pythonic way we must add LICENSE file in each module, 
and as best practice AUTHORS.txt and add Full Name (email) as list as make contributions.

All of module templates can implement it and help us.

Regards,


Cheers,

Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030" value="+41216191030" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 30
Office: <a href="tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010" value="+41216191010" target="_blank">+41 21 619 10 10

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp




--

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Alberto Barrionuevo
On 12/01/15 17:01, Ovnicraft wrote:

> Here we can do it better, there are some guides about this:
>
> # -*- coding: utf-8  -*-
>
>
> __author__=  "Full Name(email)"
> __copyright__=  "Copyright (C) YEAR FULL NAME"
> __license__=  "AGPL 3.0"
> __version__=  "1.0"
>
> So in pythonic way we must add LICENSE file in each module,
> and as best practice AUTHORS.txt and add Full Name (email) as list as make contributions.

I back this proposal.

No matter if it is possible to find authors by repositories, copyright
and license information should be within the source code files. Take in
care that open source files can be distributed out of repositories and
this makes really difficult to locate author(s) and license(s).

For example, it is quite common that code from other developers,
installed on our customers systems, come to our company to work with.
And many times it is really difficult to discover who are the actual
authors, the actual license(s) (when not in Odoo) and the actual
copyright date(s).

Sometimes we discover that info only after searching for parts of that
code on Google et al., but many other times it is impossible to know
with enough precision, and, legally speaking, we would be forced to
replace all that code. This last situation may mean a huge problem and
unnecessary effort.

Indeed, many times we discover that somebody has taken over and
re-licensed/copyrighted the code of original authors who didn't include
their copyright information within their files. Who is morally guilty in
such a case?

Just my 2 cents,
--
Alberto Barrionuevo, Director
Grupo OPENTIA
Odoo/OpenERP Silver Partners
T (+34) 918 38 38 58
F (+34) 944 34 00 77

            OPENTIA
Ingeniería Informática en Abierto
         www.opentia.com

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Leonardo "LeartS" Donelli
> For example, it is quite common that code from other developers, installed on our customers systems, come to our company to work with. And many times it is really difficult to discover who are the actual authors, the actual license(s) (when not in Odoo) and the actual copyright date(s).
> Indeed, many times we discover that somebody has taken over and re-licensed/copyrighted the code of original authors who didn't include their copyright information within their files. Who is morally guilty in such a case?

You. You should never use code that you don't know where it comes
from. Do you think that those 4 variables give any actual legal
protections?
Anybody could just have put or replaced those lines without any
"right" to do so.
Having 4 globals variables in every source file is ugly and
unmaintainable ( and who's the copyright holder of modules wrote by
multiple people, integrated with multiple PRs, ported by another set
of people?) and for what? a false sense of "legal protection" and
security.

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Ovnicraft


On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Leonardo "LeartS" Donelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> For example, it is quite common that code from other developers, installed on our customers systems, come to our company to work with. And many times it is really difficult to discover who are the actual authors, the actual license(s) (when not in Odoo) and the actual copyright date(s).
> Indeed, many times we discover that somebody has taken over and re-licensed/copyrighted the code of original authors who didn't include their copyright information within their files. Who is morally guilty in such a case?

You. You should never use code that you don't know where it comes
from. Do you think that those 4 variables give any actual legal
protections?
Anybody could just have put or replaced those lines without any
"right" to do so.
Having 4 globals variables in every source file is ugly and
unmaintainable ( and who's the copyright holder of modules wrote by
multiple people, integrated with multiple PRs, ported by another set
of people?) and for what? a false sense of "legal protection" and
security.

Changes in code has OCA team to review it, they are good people :-)
So if maintain __author__ its complicated, remove it, license is required, version can be enough with version from __openerp__ file.

I see LICENSE.txt and AUTHORS.txt required, i prefer give copyright to OCA its enough if my name is on AUTHORS.

Regards,


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Alexandre Fayolle - camptocamp
In reply to this post by Ovnicraft

> Here we can do it better, there are some guides about this:
> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
>
>
> __author__ = "Full Name(email)"
> __copyright__ = "Copyright (C) YEAR FULL NAME"
> __license__ = "AGPL 3.0"
> __version__ = "1.0"
>
> So in pythonic way we must add LICENSE file in each module,
> and as best practice AUTHORS.txt and add Full Name (email) as list as make contributions.
>
> All of module templates can implement it and help us.
>  
>

This is something I like a lot.

--
Alexandre Fayolle
Chef de Projet
Tel : + 33 (0)4 79 26 57 94

Camptocamp France SAS
Savoie Technolac, BP 352
73377 Le Bourget du Lac Cedex
http://www.camptocamp.com


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Markus Schneider
In reply to this post by Yannick Vaucher @ Camptocamp
Hi all,

short update from my side, as thinking about this topic.

I recommend:

A) Using Full Header as GNU Recommended

or

B) Using SPDX-License Header.
This is new in Open Source and maybe will make its way.
Frederik did already some research with that and we can scan complete
projects of licenses conflict. That is pretty awesome and may help us in
the future.

BUT don't invent something by our own.

About the Authorship. I see several way, so some marks:

- Their should be at least one author or Organization
- the inital module/file create is a commend option
- the current maintainer can added as well
- i prefer to collect 'contributor' collect to __openerp__ to make
header not to big (for every patch adder)
- we just can add in each header "OCA + Year" as Author as the CLA
allows to republish as the name of OCA and the human author is in
__openerp__

Hope this helps to get the discussion forward.

Kind Regards

Markus

On 08.01.2015 11:46, Yannick Vaucher wrote:

> This is a good idea to follow some standard.
>
> However, SPDX meta tag "SPDX-License-Identifier" is not yet widely used.
>
> It seems that it was firstly used by U-boot project
> https://github.com/linux-sunxi/u-boot-sunxi/commit/1a4596601fd395f3afb8f82f3f840c5e00bdd57a
>
> AFAICT it is still under draft proposal:
> http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Technical_Team/SPDX_Meta_Tags
> http://www.fossology.org/issues/6051
>
> So the idea is good to try to comply with SPDX, and if we agree with
> this early adoption, then here would be the new header:
>
> # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-||
> |# Copyright 2015 <company or author>|
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3
> # For license see __openerp__.py or http://spdx.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0||
>
> With author and contributors in __openerp__.py
>
> And I'm not sure about what to put or not in __openerp__.py and weither
> or not we should keep the pointer to __openerp__.py
> Nevertheless, as our modules can be downloaded from apps.odoo.com
> <http://apps.odoo.com>, and thus it wouldn't include root LICENSE file,
> we do need to keep __openerp__.py as it or to include LICENSE file at
> module level.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Yannick Vaucher
> Business Solutions Software Developer
>
> Camptocamp SA
> PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
> Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
> Office: +41 21 619 10 10
> http://www.camptocamp.com/
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Jerry Van Baren <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     On 01/05/2015 06:09 AM, Yannick Vaucher wrote:
>>     Most developers dislike redundancy, thus, all are tempted to
>>     reduce the size of source code by reducing or completly removing
>>     redundant license from source files. [1]
>     [snip]
>>     To be said I'm completely against removing completely the header I
>>     think a minimal copyright must be present in each source file to
>>     be read by the one who opens the file.
>     Suggestion: switch to the SPDX notation on as the license note in
>     the header of the files. This achieves minimal footprint in a
>     machine and human recognizable format using a standard format (for
>     some definition of standard).
>
>     Random(ish) example: cmd_fdt.c
>     <http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=common/cmd_fdt.c;h=dc59fab8280dc57f0ae546ad552215dea0d99774;hb=HEAD>
>
>     References:
>
>       * http://spdx.org/about-spdx
>       * http://spdx.org/licenses/
>       * http://spdx.org/SPDX-specifications/spdx-version-1.2
>
>>     To be minimalist, from what I read there thought, we could also
>>     accept minimal header with license like this
>>     |# Copyright 2015 <author>
>>     # <notice where to find full licence>|
>>     (with full license in __openerp__.py for exemple)
>>     Exemple here [2]
>     Agreed, but I would use the SPDX notation in the header to make it
>     standard(ish) and scannable.
>>
>>     Our options:
>>     a. We keep full header on each source file. And accept only this one.
>>      
>>     b. We define a minimal header template like this as an altenative
>>     (mostly taken from David Beal's proposal):
>>     # -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
>>     ||# Author: <author name>
>>     |# Copyright 2015 <company or author>|
>>     # License AGPL version 3 or later
>>     |# See license in __openerp__.py or http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.txt
>>     |
>>
>>
>>
>>     [1] More talks about it in:
>>     https://github.com/OCA/product-attribute/pull/34
>>
>>     [2] An exemple of minimal license:
>>     https://github.com/OCA/carrier-delivery/pull/35/files
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>
>>     Yannick Vaucher
>>     Business Solutions Software Developer
>>
>>     Camptocamp SA
>>     PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
>>     Phone: +41 21 619 10 30 <tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2030>
>>     Office: +41 21 619 10 10 <tel:%2B41%2021%20619%2010%2010>
>>     http://www.camptocamp.com/
>>
>
>     Best regards,
>     gvb
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>     Post to     : [hidden email]
>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

--
Dipl.-Comp.-Math. Markus Schneider
Softwareentwickler

initOS GmbH & Co. KG
An der Eisenbahn 1
21224 Rosengarten

Mobil:   +49 (0)172 2303699
Phone:   +49 (0)4105 5615613
Fax:     +49 (0)4105 5615610

Email:   [hidden email]
Web:     http://www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dipl. Wirt.-Inf. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke
Haftende Gesellschafterin: initOS Verwaltungs GmbH

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Rosengarten – Klecken
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRA 201840
USt-IdNr: DE 275698169
Steuer-Nr: 15/205/21402

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Openerp-community] Licenses guidelines for OCA modules

Dominique Chabord
hi,
if I understand the request, Nevertheless, I'm not sure the current
period is the best one to modify anything about licence and copyright
notices, as it can become a hot topic soon.
my 2cts only.

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
Post to     : [hidden email]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Loading...