[Development] QUIP-18 and file "reclassification"

[Marc Mutz]

Hi,

1/
I today refused to perform a re-licensing of a .cpp file being renamed 
to .qdoc.¹ QUIP-18² has no provisions for files transitioning between 
what QUIP-18 calls file "classifications"³, even if they have different 
required license specifiers.

Can someone please clarify the process here?

2/
In the same vein, it seems to me to be illogical to require to have a 
class-only .qdoc file have a different license from the equivalent .cpp 
file. These files may change from .cpp to .qdoc back back several times, 
depending on whether there is some C++ code in the file or not (doesn't 
have to be the implementation of a member function, could just be a 
static_assert() that we don't want to waste CPU cycles on by including 
it in the header).

Should be make a distinction between "pure" .qdoc files and those that 
are essentially .cpp files that just lack (C++) content?

3/
And, finally, shouldn't .cpp files that contain qdoc comment blocks 
contain the "right" license for documentation, as it's different from 
code? Then a rename would also not require a re-licensing.

¹ https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/612565
² https://contribute.qt-project.org/quips/18
³ https://contribute.qt-project.org/quips/18#classification-of-files

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at qt.io> (he/his)
Principal Software Engineer

The Qt Company
Erich-Thilo-Str. 10 12489
Berlin, Germany
www.qt.io

Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Jouni Lintunen
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin,
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg,
HRB 144331 B