Cleanup license type & license holder about vita-headers

[devnoname120]

While we are at it, can we shorten all those license preambles to only point to a LICENSE.MD file? They uselessly clutter all the header files.

[D5C85B13876B8]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[173210]

I would like to keep it under MPL, but I'll follow others' decisions.

[173210]

@enoposix Now I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license. 👍

[yifanlu]

If that's the only blocker, then I say proceed.

[yne]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

because I can't wait to get ride of all those headers

[jdek]

@d3m3vilurr I wonder if we could just cheat and do Copyright (C) 2015-2017 vitasdk

[d3m3vilurr]

@devnoname120 some license require shorten describe in header section of all files. and lisence file should contain license full text. in this case MPL also need. (because MPL 2.0 have long license text ;) )

MIT license not need this rule, they are already shorten license text and another project also only use license file.

but we still cannot use license file until change base license :/

@enoposix haha. yes. :)

[endrift]

That's odd, I thought I attached a license to that file. Let me attach a license in a PR.

[xyzz]

• @MrNetrix
• @xyzz
• @Smoke5
• @TheOfficialFloW
• @xerpi
• @yifanlu
• @wootguy
• @D5C85B13876B8
• @ribbid987
• @Rinnegatamante
• @endrift
• @yne
• @himanshugoel2797
• @codestation
• @173210
• @ralekdev
• @FirebirdTA01
• @DaveeFTW
• @frangarcj
• @enoposix
• @d3m3vilurr
• @HybridEidolon
• @geekbozu
• @devnoname120

---

We're trying to relicense vitasdk headers under the MIT license, full text below:

 * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
 * of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
 * in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
 * to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
 * copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
 * furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
 * 
 * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
 * all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
 * 
 * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
 * IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
 * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
 * AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
 * LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
 * OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
 * THE SOFTWARE.

---

Please, post in this issue one of the following:

• I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license
• I disagree that my contributions are relicensed to MIT

Thank you.

[devnoname120]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license.

[xyzz]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[endrift]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license. (As I mentioned on IRC.)

[d3m3vilurr]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[frangarcj]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[wootguy]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license.

lol all I did was comment on a function.

[jdek]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[himanshugoel2797]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[MrNetrix]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[xerpi]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[ralekdev]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[geekbozu]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

Frankly I forgot that it wasn't MIT to begin with. Cheers to my favorite license :D

[yifanlu]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[TheOfficialFloW]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[FirebirdTA01]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[jdek]

@173210 could you please clarify, and state either of the options? We'd just like to be 100% sure.

[codestation]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[yifanlu]

@Smoke5 responded to me

I don't have access to the SMOKE5 account (not compromised, just dunno password) I agree to the relicensing

[DaveeFTW]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[Rinnegatamante]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license

[ribbid987]

I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license Am 30.11.2016 9:04 nachm. schrieb "Rinnegatamante" <[email protected]

…

: I agree that my past contributions to vitasdk or psp2sdk are relicensed to the MIT license — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#104 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMa9OLUqK05IpatPtnetdakAD3_buM-Wks5rDdbMgaJpZM4K_A-Y> .

[HybridEidolon]

I agree to relicensing to MIT.

[devnoname120]

The only approval missing is @D5C85B13876B8's.

Here are their contributions:

• cf92890
• 4b0bad6

Knowing that the change in the first commit is just a value swap, and the second one is a function prototype that is really similar to the ones above, do they qualify for copyright?