On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see how the copyright of MediaWiki's code is bike-shedding at all. As a volunteer, I'd like to be damn sure MW is actually an open source project.
There's a reason copyright licenses exist, and it's to provide freedom for developers and users. If MW were completely licensed under the WTFPL, others could copy MW, change it, and then make it proprietary, whereas with the GPL there is a restriction on that. When I contribute my code to this project, I am fully aware and happy with the fact that it will *never* be used in a closed source product.
Just because some people don't care enough about how laws exist in this world and we have to operate under them doesn't mean everybody else should be screwed over. So if we could actually get back on topic rather than bitching and complaining about doing things some of us don't necessarily enjoy.
There's a definite difference between caring about how the code is licensed and debating whether or not headers should be included in minified versions or not. I care how our code is licensed (and headers are great for doing this), but wasting 60+ e-mails over where to include these licenses just to satisfy an overzealous tool...that's bikeshedding.
-Chad