Update copyrights

[LeChatP]

As discussed on Discord, I am raising this issue to clarify the authorship of this package. The project is licensed under MIT/Apache-2.0, but I’d like confirmation on the original author or maintainers for proper attribution.

[WeepingClown13]

Having a clear copyright owner helps us very much when packaging/redistributing the software downstream. And in Debian where we care about license compliance as absolute, it's a huge help.

[Veetaha]

Hi, sure, I've scheduled Elastio-internal discussion about this for tomorrow. Will clarify the copyright owner as a result of it

[WeepingClown13]

@Veetaha awesome! Do you think at least a patch relese will be possible once that change is there?

[Veetaha]

Yes, I'll do a patch release right after that is done. Note that there was one nuance with the internal darling dependency of bon-macros in that the latest patches of bon (v3.6.5+). I updated the code to darling 0.21, and bon no longer works with darling 0.20, which is the latest version of darling available in Debian IIRC. That update to darling 0.21 resulted in a really small amount of code changes (#320), which I can revert in a patch 3.6.8, so that the debian package could compile with the older version of darling. I can return back that #320 at a later time, it's not too important

[WeepingClown13]

thank you! it looks like a few packages need updates if darling has to be updated, so that'd be a great help <3

[Veetaha]

We've discussed this internally. In short, we'll set the copyright owner for 2024 Elastio Software Inc, while I'll keep maintaining the repo indefinitely.

In retrospect, I'd put this repo under an independent org. I started it as a side project and I've put it under this org just because I started using it as a dependency in our internal repos and didn't think about copyright too much (frankly, I just copied the license files and various notices from the serde repo, where they didn't have any copyright header), and this was my first time crating an open-source repo with a greater reach. While transferring/forking this repo now is possible, it's a bit more disruptive than I'd like. So, this is what I'll do. My main concern here was with keeping the maintainership of the repo, which I should have

[LeChatP]

Just to clarify ; when you say transferring/forking the repo would be disruptive, is that mainly because of the URL change? My understanding is that Github keeps permanent redirects in place, so existing links and dependencies continue working. (I said that bc we did it well for my project). I’m wondering if there’s another kind of disruption you have in mind.

Anyway, we'll do with 2024 Elastio Software Inc for now. Copyrights can evolve.
Thanks a lot for your help and for maintaining this project!

[WeepingClown13]

@Veetaha your call! Thanks for all your work and help. So as mentioned before, could we expect that it'll be followed by a patch release?

[Veetaha]

if there’s another kind of disruption you have in mind.

Just some churn for the company's audit, which I'd like to avoid. In any case, the PR is here: #331. Let me know if that's enough of the explicitness.

could we expect that it'll be followed by a patch release?

Yeah, will do, was busy with other stuff till now. Waiting for your approval on #331

[Veetaha]

Published an optimistic release v3.7.1 with the Copyright added to the MIT license's body (forgot that I already did a minor 3.7.0 recently, in any case it should be fully compatible with 3.6.4, and it includes a revert for #320).

Feel free to reach out if anything else could be improved. I'm equally availalble here or on Discord