Hi Stephen, Yes, generally you can shorten it as long as it is still easily readable by humans and the linked references contains all the required copyright and licensing information (note my response below was meant as a general example for MediaWiki based on best practices rather than advice on the specific language we must use). For example, while removing the Copyright word with © might shorten things, it might make it harder for someone to search for the copyright information via the word "Copyright". As a certain point, making the header more concise might no longer be worth the cost to user comprehension.
Thanks, Zhou Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:21:53 -0600 > From: Stephen Niedzielski <[email protected]> > To: Wikimedia developers <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Short license blocks > Message-ID: > <CANMtf2doHfh54qE=UGNrEZb0W= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Zhou, thanks for your comment. Would it be possible to put the entire > license on one line? Using your example: > > > This file is part of the MediaWiki Project. Copyright 2015 The MediaWiki > Project Developers. For full copyright information and for the licensing > terms governing the project and all its files, see the COPYING file at the > top-level directory of this distribution and at > https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki/blob/master/COPYING. > > Is there anything creative we could do to shorten that line? Maybe replace > Copyright with ©, and use a (permanent) shortened link for the URL and drop > the reference to the top-level directory? > > > --stephen > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Zhou Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Thanks to Gergo for bringing up this issue. Everyone has raised good > > points and I just want to link to existing guidance from the Software > > Freedom Law Center > > < > > > https://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2012/ManagingCopyrightInformation.html > > > > > on > > best practices for developers to address the problem of long license and > > copyright headers by linking to external files. As noted in the > guidance > > document, by referencing the appropriate information files located in a > > centralized location, not only do we reduce clutter in the header but we > > also increase maintainability of license and copyright info. > > > > Therefore for the header, as an example, we could have something like > this: > > > > > > > > This file is part of the MediaWiki Project. Copyright 2015 The > MediaWiki > > > Project Developers. > > > > > > For full copyright information and for the licensing terms governing > the > > > project and all its files, see the COPYING file at the top-level > > directory > > > of this distribution and at > > > https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki/blob/master/COPYING. > > > > > > where in turn the COPYING file could contain references to the updated > list > > of authors, a description of the project, and the licensing information. > > > > As to the specifics of SPDX use for all our projects and licenses, we > will > > have to do a little more research on this. Happy to talk off-thread > about > > this as well. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Zhou > > > > > > > > > From: Tyler Romeo <[email protected]> > > > Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:03 PM > > > Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Short license blocks > > > To: Wikimedia developers <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > The Apache license, which is also permissive, has a similar recommended > > > file header. > > > > > > I'd say we just standardize on having the warranty disclaimer and > license > > > notice in every file. It's an easy approach to make sure somebody > reading > > > the file can easily tell the license without having to maintain > > > comprehensive authorship information in every file. > > > On Oct 27, 2015 14:17, "Ryan Kaldari" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I was saying that we could go ahead and make this the standard for > > > non-GPL > > > > MediaWiki code (basically, the few MIT licensed extensions). I'm not > > sure > > > > if the advantage of doing that would outweigh the disadvantage of > > having > > > a > > > > non-standard standard though. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Tyler Romeo <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are you saying adopting the short license blocks? Or the MIT > license? > > > > > Because I'm not sure how the licenses of extensions would affect > the > > > > > license headers in core. > > > > > On Oct 27, 2015 12:43, "Ryan Kaldari" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > <flamebait> > > > > > > I totally support switching to license identifiers instead of > > > headers, > > > > > > provided that we also switch our licensing from GPL to MIT or BSD > > ;) > > > > > > </flamebait> > > > > > > > > > > > > On a serious note, we do have a fair number of extensions that > are > > > MIT > > > > > > Licensed and could go ahead and adopt this ( > > > > > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:MIT_licensed_extensions > ). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Gergo Tisza < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a recent blog post ( http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6867 ) ESR > > > writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > High on my list of Things That Annoy Me When I Hack is > > sourcefiles > > > > that > > > > > > > > contain huge blobs of license text at the top. That is > valuable > > > > > > territory > > > > > > > > which should be occupied by a header comment explaining the > > code, > > > > > not a > > > > > > > > boatload of boilerplate that I’ve seen hundreds of times > > before. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...and then goes on to explain using SPDX identifiers to refer > to > > > > > > licenses, > > > > > > > which would look something like this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* Copyright 2015 by XYZ > > > > > > > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any objections to making that the new standard / replacing > > existing > > > > > > blocks > > > > > > > with this? It would make the PHP files a little more readable. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Zhou Zhou > > Legal Counsel > > Wikimedia Foundation > > 149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor > > San Francisco, CA 94105 > > [email protected] > > > > NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged > > information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please > > delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the > > Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal > advice > > to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff > > members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please > see > > our legal disclaimer > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>. > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > ******************************************* > -- Zhou Zhou Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 [email protected] NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
