Our license headers for libpurple have another difference besides just the fsf's website.
/* * Purple - Internet Messaging Library * Copyright (C) Pidgin Developers <email@example.com> *
libpurple/purplerequestfield.c (Diff revision 1)
Do we gain anything by having this abstract?
The only reason I can think of to make this not abstract is it'd make writing unit tests to make sure properties are okay difficult as you'd have to subclass.
Also I'm not saying we would leave the constuctor around as it wouldn't be needed.
Cleanup request field files
Review Request #2342 — Created March 11, 2023 and submitted
A variety of small followups to splitting the request objects into separate files: * Make
PurpleRequestFieldinto an abstract type and drop the field type enum. * Add request files to GObject introspection. * Replace
purple_debugwith GLib logging. * Remove extra
#includewhere possible. * Remove most early
typedefwhich were there for
#includeloops. * Put
G_DEFINE_TYPEin a consistent place. * Add
Sincetags to objects since they are new (but not the functions), and also to all of
PurpleRequestGroupwhich were fully renamed. * Use website for GNU reference in license header. * Clean up old entries in
Compiled, then checked Class Hierarchy in docs and confirmed that the structs were now there.
Fix more license header inconsistencies.
Revision 2 (+338 -594)