On Monday 27 July 2009, Julie S wrote: > I guess I should also add some licensing tagline stuff. > > Any thoughts on what to put exactly?
Looks very nice though! Very nice! I guess I'd have it read something like: <h1>Rosegarden - "Thorn"</h1> <h2>A sequencer and musical notation editor</h2> <h3>Copyright 2000-2009 the Rosegarden development team</h3> [the version/build key/Qt version info as presented] [the team of volunteers text is fine, but the link underneath the text should point to http://rosegardenmusic.com/resources/authors/ if it doesn't already, and I'd remove the final "/." from the end, just finishing with "go to http://rosegardenmusic.com</p>" (Pet peeve of mine. If you can't find an unambiguous way to punctuate the end of a sentence that terminates with a URL, don't punctuate it at all.) Then put a license bit under that. KMail's presentation looks like a good model to follow. They have this line at the bottom: License: GNU General Public License Version 2 That line links to some internal code that pops up a dialog with some kind of QTextSomething widget in it that cats out a copy of what would be our COPYING file. It looks nice, but I don't think I'd go that far. I'd probably just link this one externally too. Actually, the whole license issue is a big can of worms by itself. I just did a little surfing for a reliable external link, and got into all kinds of GPL2 vs. GPL3 stuff. The licenses are not compatible, and we have all kinds of random borrowed code snippets, all from GPL 2 or LGPL 2 sources as far as I can see (except that one Artistic License file Ohloh.net complains about.) We have boilerplate text everywhere saying "or, at your option, any newer version of this license" but my quick armchair read of that is we're granting permission to use Rosegarden under GPL3 (assuming that the "this" in "this license" refers to the GPL part, not the 2.x part), and by extension, all these random code snippets that we ourselves used under GPL2. I don't think we can, in fact, grant that permission, or relicense under GPL3 ourselves without far more trouble than it could possibly ever be worth. So I move to remove all the boilerplate "at your option" nonsense, and just keep Rosegarden permanently stationed at GPL 2. Chris? -- D. Michael McIntyre ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
