On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <asmeu...@gmail.com> wrote: > So, I am opposed to this proposal. I think that such things are a waste of > space, make updating the copyright at the year change more difficult, and, if > they are really long (like they are sometimes) can scare people away from the > source code. > > You can also see my and Ondrej's comments on the pull request where Priit > originally proposed this here: > http://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/15#issuecomment-489603 (the comments are > buried in the rest of the review unfortunately).
I am copy & pasting the comments. -------------- Ondrej: As to the header + license, the license should be BSD and I prefer to have just one license, see the LICENSE file for details. As to authors, currently we have AUTHORS and also the about us section which explains who did what: http://docs.sympy.org/aboutus.html#sympy-development-team and for the fine details, I would use git blame. For little things, like this residue, I don't think it's a good idea to put people's names into the file itself. For some big things, like geometric algebra, it might make sense though. The main argument against it is so that we keep polishing and integrating things in sympy, so that it works well together. (as opposed to have a collection of separate modules, each written by somebody else, without much cooperation) -------------- Aaron: What is the motivation for the license at the top of the files? And does it relate to this review in particular; I am confused? I personally think that doing that for every file is a waste of time and space, and I don't really like having each individual author for each file. If you want to know, you can use git to find out, but listing people goes against the community authorship (I maybe am not phrasing this the best way, but you understand what I am getting at). That's my view anyway. Ondrej, what is your opinion? EDIT: Yeah, so you agree with me. -------------- Ondrej: As to authors --- I agree with Aaron. We clearly need to give credit to all sympy authors, and the place for that is the "about us" section, we should try to make it more public, e.g. maybe add a section to our new pages at sympy.org. -------------- But I agree that each module should have a docstring explaining what it is doing. Ondrej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
