License is poorly documented

[ebroder]

setup.py and debian/copyright in the debian branch mention that the project is licensed as GPL, but the package should really have a COPYING file, and the files in the project should have a standard license header.

I also can't find any evidence that I picked a specific variant of "GPL" and although I generally prefer GPLv2-no-plus, I should probably clear that with all past contributors.

[kcr]

I have this horrible feeling that it may not be 100% kosher to have GPL(2?) code that links with AFS's slightly wacky license.

[ebroder]

I have no objection to re-licensing all of my contributions at MIT but don't really have much interest in tracking down buy-in from other contributors.