[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Éric Araujo added the comment: Agreed with the latest comment! -- nosy: +eric.araujo, rhettinger resolution: -> works for me stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: -Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Braden Groom added the comment: It seems like this can be closed unless we want to remove the current header in argparse.py. -- nosy: +bradengroom ___ Python tracker ___

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Changes by Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl: -- nosy: +djc ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17514 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Georg Brandl added the comment: Speaking personally, I wouldn't want license boilerplates to start cluttering every file in the Python source tree. They are an annoyance when opening and reading source files. On the other hand, a simple file header would make sense, and make standard

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Georg Brandl added the comment: BTW, the correct blurb would probably be # Copyright 200X Steven Bethard. All Rights Reserved. # Licensed to PSF under a Contributor Agreement. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I'm not sure that's correct, unless only Steven has ever contributed to it. To be correct, you'd have to list all significant contributors. But still, the maintenance burden of per-file copyright headers (including the need to bump dates now and then) is

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Georg Brandl added the comment: I'm not sure that's correct, unless only Steven has ever contributed to it. To be correct, you'd have to list all significant contributors. Well, then add and contributors :) But we have quite a few files with such a header (one person), which would be wrong.

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I'm not sure that's correct, unless only Steven has ever contributed to it. To be correct, you'd have to list all significant contributors. Well, then add and contributors :) But we have quite a few files with such a header (one person), which would be

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: The whole Python distribution is licensed under the PSF license unless stated otherwise, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about? Just update your script so that it understand this simple matter. Besides I don't understand why you're complaining

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: That said if it's a simple one-liner I'm ok. You'll just have to wait for a core developer who's motivated enough to make such changes :-) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Tshepang Lekhonkhobe added the comment: @Antoine OP is interesting in only that file. Why not just add that single line at the top (at least for 2.7, and 3.3+)? -- nosy: +tshepang ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

New submission from David James: Lib/argparse.py [1] doesn't mention a license in it. Could you please add a license to it? According to the argparse project [2], argparse is licensed under the Python license. Chromium OS uses argparse. If you would add information about the license to

[issue17514] Add the license to argparse.py

Changes by Berker Peksag berker.pek...@gmail.com: -- versions: -Python 2.6, Python 3.1, Python 3.5 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17514 ___