Some test files are missing license header

[Orace]

Some tests file don't have headers.

We have to choose the license and reference the authors:

To find the authors, we can go through git history for each file.
For the licence, we can take the headers from the tested method.

[Orace]

@atifaziz should we do one PR by file?

[atifaziz]

I think the test headers need a complete review with respect to the copyright notice also because we have different copyright holders for different methods depending on original contribution. I addressed this mostly in 57295ff and 827b630 but didn't find it a priority for tests assuming that people wouldn't be using that code in other projects. For the tests, it might be a fair compromise to have the copyright notice just read:

Copyright (c) 2008 MoreLINQ contributors. All rights reserved.

Otherwise you have to dig up the Git history and fix each notice correctly based on original contributors. That's what I did for the main project code and it was a lot of work.

@atifaziz should we do one PR by file?

This is a single logical issue so it's fine to address it across all files in one PR.

[atifaziz]

@atifaziz should we do one PR by file?

This is a single logical issue so it's fine to address it across all files in one PR.

I would add the headers in one PR and fix the copyright notice to a generic one in another as two logically separate changes (easier to do and revert).

[Orace]

I think the test headers need a complete review with respect to the copyright notice also because we have different copyright holders for different methods depending on original contribution.

I need clarification here, since there is different licenses used in the code base, for BlaTest if no headers are present should we take:

• the one from Bla
• the one from Apache License 2.0 (copying.txt)

Anyway I understand that we take the copyright holder from Bla in a first time.

And anyway, you can assign it to me.

[Orace]

Turn out missing license was Apache anyway.