Hello Igor,
This idea is interesting. Would you describe a typical usage scenario? It could be all right as long as one doesn't have to retype (or being reminded) the license each and every time.
However, the new community development model manifesto has a section about the license. The trunk on the web has a link to this manifesto. There's so much one can do to protect himself. But when shall it stop?
Even a pop-up Window stipulating that the upcoming commit would be under MIT license with an "I agree" button would probably not stand any better. A paranoid mind could easily think that a malicious person could as well insert proprietary code and commit. That would be no easier to determine this until it blows into our face.
Ian.
2009/7/22 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
Hello list,
on a recent SOB meeting someone recalled the idea of adding a 'license' field to method stamps. I proposed this maybe a year ago, but at that time, it was seem to have a short life period, because of upcoming Spoon release, which contains a full method history and supports a much better organized method history/author/license tracking.
In our current state, when we have a /trunk , we need, however some kind of assurance that all submissions going to trunk is license-clean. So, it is like that proposed change gives us a quick & fast recipe how to assure that.
Please review the mantis entry: http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
And lets discuss openly, the pros and cons of this change.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.