[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info - Pacman-dev

newer
[pacman-dev] [GIT] The official...

[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

older
[pacman-dev] [PATCH] fix geometric...

Robin de Rooij

20 Jan 2015 20 Jan '15

7:26 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 - From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015 Signed-off-by: Robin de Rooij (Everyone knows the name of Google's email service, replace famousgoglemailhoster with Google's real email service - --- src/pacman/pacman.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/pacman/pacman.c b/src/pacman/pacman.c index 792c994..28df482 100644 - --- a/src/pacman/pacman.c +++ b/src/pacman/pacman.c @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static void version(void) { printf("\n"); printf(" .--. Pacman v%s - libalpm v%s\n", PACKAGE_VERSION, alpm_version()); - - printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team\n"); + printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2015 Pacman Development Team\n"); printf("\\ '-. '-' '-' '-' Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Judd Vinet\n"); printf(" '--'\n"); printf(_(" This program may be freely redistributed under\n" - -- 2.2.2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUvp3rAAoJELLn5Yq1geB/M5kP/10w686cpq5gohnQe7RGZEHa biQshe0CQbKVhpsie0DRX8ybwDDpFkarymo/g8BBVRbei1aAN7k+3gH+g1kaLUue nUVKesO95/DMBbRrGnwMBUOkg/oG0GWZ5KlMVv4bBgJQou5vMhlPP9sFbLmPH5YX FQKqUm6u3oods0OPHIKbdhInWSZBrJM7tnMjVTN9C1BtKCFqJ4dlvqctGzqarXr5 p+aCJNNtukUTCM3xz5wYaAf6Aeosfi9GM+gOoJyfHyz00WTKhFnpQBWgYGot0Frm poMfxjpt4G62MthHBOWzNdIzgLq3AtLVhSxMrrbunAxdzfk7sWypTx9j8+w6eKcl kWqfZTrsz8otV3DG8IBkdisHGGvnWbjtDbT/XJ7gq9zqFrAmnNxxBwnDhHV0cItN hp9ZScv5g16E9JQKTW/uhYlb09wtbwkO13SN1C1gmeyKqYYWDFQg3qUT+54LDND3 6AF6TNmQo/uLV5+xsioiPyDgoFdpbYnO1zDQzUv57URYm74SVKbakDb0JgY11Vlb bcDKNKXE5vJBxO9GkbMHueJE3zeLORkb8blo8x69AIR5B81z3Oh15sO6FecDSDM+ k6kd44dGH11pxbu13woLEDk2SmGSt8bdfd73kKYNb4zEveWicdNljrVNAoONGAW7 Kpr7vY/4AVGiKCt0rO2J =yAYP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Show replies by date

Florian Pritz

20 Jan 20 Jan

7:48 p.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On 20.01.2015 19:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...

From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

Please use imperative mood in subject lines to stay in line with what tools like git merge and git revert do (Revert .., Merge ...), to make the verb shorter (Changed -> Change) and to make it more readable when being reverted (Revert "Changed .." -> Revert "Change ..").

...

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

Signed-off-by: Robin de Rooij (Everyone knows the name of Google's email service, replace famousgoglemailhoster with Google's real email service

Your email address is already visible in the list archives so this is unnecessary. That said I'm very biased towards using good spam filters and against making life harder for users (which scrambling your email address is doing for everyone involved) so ymmv. Apart from that please use git-send-email to send patches in the future as this is yet another example of other software messing up whitespace and/or line breaks. In this case it's somewhat easy to fix because the patch is small. Also patchwork (patch tracking system) doesn't pick up this patch (likely because of the formatting issue) so it could get lost.

...

--- src/pacman/pacman.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/pacman/pacman.c b/src/pacman/pacman.c index 792c994..28df482 100644 --- a/src/pacman/pacman.c +++ b/src/pacman/pacman.c @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static void version(void) { printf("\n"); printf(" .--. Pacman v%s - libalpm v%s\n", PACKAGE_VERSION, alpm_version()); - printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team\n"); + printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2015 Pacman Development Team\n"); printf("\\ '-. '-' '-' '-' Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Judd Vinet\n"); printf(" '--'\n"); printf(_(" This program may be freely redistributed under\n"

Robin de Rooij

7:59 p.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad that this was a minor edit, otherwise line formatting would be a big issue. I wasn't aware of the fact that Thunderbird messed it up. Your feedback is appreciated. To be honest, I've never helped developing with projects in this manner (mailing lists, submitting patches instead of just using GitHub), so I'm sorry for the messed up patch submission. git-send-email will be used here in the future. Oh, and sorry for scrambling my email address like that! Kind regards, Robin On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Florian Pritz wrote:

...

On 20.01.2015 19:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...
From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

Please use imperative mood in subject lines to stay in line with what tools like git merge and git revert do (Revert .., Merge ...), to make the verb shorter (Changed -> Change) and to make it more readable when being reverted (Revert "Changed .." -> Revert "Change ..").

...
The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

Signed-off-by: Robin de Rooij (Everyone knows the name of Google's email service, replace famousgoglemailhoster with Google's real email service

Your email address is already visible in the list archives so this is unnecessary. That said I'm very biased towards using good spam filters and against making life harder for users (which scrambling your email address is doing for everyone involved) so ymmv.

Apart from that please use git-send-email to send patches in the future as this is yet another example of other software messing up whitespace and/or line breaks. In this case it's somewhat easy to fix because the patch is small.

Also patchwork (patch tracking system) doesn't pick up this patch (likely because of the formatting issue) so it could get lost.

...
--- src/pacman/pacman.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/pacman/pacman.c b/src/pacman/pacman.c index 792c994..28df482 100644 --- a/src/pacman/pacman.c +++ b/src/pacman/pacman.c @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static void version(void) { printf("\n"); printf(" .--. Pacman v%s - libalpm v%s\n", PACKAGE_VERSION, alpm_version()); - printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team\n"); + printf("/ _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2015 Pacman Development Team\n"); printf("\\ '-. '-' '-' '-' Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Judd Vinet\n"); printf(" '--'\n"); printf(_(" This program may be freely redistributed under\n"

Allan McRae

11:36 p.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On 21/01/15 04:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...

From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

This needs to be part of a larger patch that changes all our copyright years to the correct range. A

Dan McGee

21 Jan 21 Jan

12:38 a.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 21/01/15 04:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...
From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

This needs to be part of a larger patch that changes all our copyright years to the correct range.

We go through this seemingly silly exercise every year. Is it truly necessary? We have this kind of thing now: /* * pacman.c * * Copyright (c) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org> * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet * If we did something like this instead, we can then have one central COPYRIGHT file perhaps? /* * pacman.c * * See the COPYRIGHT file for individual attributions. * COPYRIGHT would look something like this: Portions of this codebase fall under various copyrights and authorships. As the code is a continual work in progress and has been moved around and reshaped over time, copyright assignment to individual files does not always reflect reality. Please use version control tools to better grasp the lineage and history of a given piece of code. Known copyright holders include the following: * Copyright (c) 2001 by François Gouget * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet * Copyright (c) 2005 by Aurelien Foret * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Christian Hamar * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Miklos Vajna * Copyright (c) 2006 by David Kimpe * Copyright (c) 2006 by Andras Voroskoi * Copyright (c) 2006 by Alex Smith * Copyright (c) 2007 by Aaron Griffin * Copyright (c) 2009 by Xavier Chantry * Copyright (c) 2006-2015 by Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org> Thoughts? The copyright at file granularity concept seems super outdated to me. -Dan

Daniel Micay

1:52 a.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On 20/01/15 06:38 PM, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...
On 21/01/15 04:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...
From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

This needs to be part of a larger patch that changes all our copyright years to the correct range.

We go through this seemingly silly exercise every year. Is it truly necessary?

AFAIK, it does have meaning (extends the lifetime of the copyright, which expires N years after that date) but nothing stops you from treating the entire project as one work and only having a top-level license + copyright headers.

...

We have this kind of thing now:

/* * pacman.c * * Copyright (c) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org> * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet *

If we did something like this instead, we can then have one central COPYRIGHT file perhaps?

/* * pacman.c * * See the COPYRIGHT file for individual attributions. *

COPYRIGHT would look something like this:

Portions of this codebase fall under various copyrights and authorships. As the code is a continual work in progress and has been moved around and reshaped over time, copyright assignment to individual files does not always reflect reality. Please use version control tools to better grasp the lineage and history of a given piece of code. Known copyright holders include the following:

* Copyright (c) 2001 by François Gouget * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet * Copyright (c) 2005 by Aurelien Foret * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Christian Hamar * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Miklos Vajna * Copyright (c) 2006 by David Kimpe * Copyright (c) 2006 by Andras Voroskoi * Copyright (c) 2006 by Alex Smith * Copyright (c) 2007 by Aaron Griffin * Copyright (c) 2009 by Xavier Chantry * Copyright (c) 2006-2015 by Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org>

Thoughts? The copyright at file granularity concept seems super outdated to me.

It seems entirely useless if the project is under a unified license. If there are various licenses, then isolating them can make sense. A project might want to preserve liberal licensing for some files even though it primarily uses the GPL, or it might want to isolate some GPL code so the project can be liberally licensed if it is removed. None of that is applicable to Pacman AFAIK.

Dan McGee

2:06 a.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Daniel Micay wrote:

...

On 20/01/15 06:38 PM, Dan McGee wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...
On 21/01/15 04:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...
From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

This needs to be part of a larger patch that changes all our copyright years to the correct range.

We go through this seemingly silly exercise every year. Is it truly necessary?

AFAIK, it does have meaning (extends the lifetime of the copyright, which expires N years after that date) but nothing stops you from treating the entire project as one work and only having a top-level license + copyright headers.

Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear here - I meant the "update every file" exercise, not the "we should extend the copyright dates somewhere" bit.

...

We have this kind of thing now:

...
/* * pacman.c * * Copyright (c) 2006-2014 Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org> * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet *

If we did something like this instead, we can then have one central COPYRIGHT file perhaps?

/* * pacman.c * * See the COPYRIGHT file for individual attributions. *

COPYRIGHT would look something like this:

Portions of this codebase fall under various copyrights and authorships.

As

...
the code is a continual work in progress and has been moved around and reshaped over time, copyright assignment to individual files does not always reflect reality. Please use version control tools to better grasp the lineage and history of a given piece of code. Known copyright holders include the following:

* Copyright (c) 2001 by François Gouget * Copyright (c) 2002-2006 by Judd Vinet * Copyright (c) 2005 by Aurelien Foret * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Christian Hamar * Copyright (c) 2005-2006 by Miklos Vajna * Copyright (c) 2006 by David Kimpe * Copyright (c) 2006 by Andras Voroskoi * Copyright (c) 2006 by Alex Smith * Copyright (c) 2007 by Aaron Griffin * Copyright (c) 2009 by Xavier Chantry * Copyright (c) 2006-2015 by Pacman Development Team < pacman-dev@archlinux.org>

Thoughts? The copyright at file granularity concept seems super outdated to me.

It seems entirely useless if the project is under a unified license.

If there are various licenses, then isolating them can make sense. A project might want to preserve liberal licensing for some files even though it primarily uses the GPL, or it might want to isolate some GPL code so the project can be liberally licensed if it is removed. None of that is applicable to Pacman AFAIK

Almost everything is under a unified license. There are a few exceptions as far as original source, and I believe this covers all of them. I would leave this subset of files alone and not include them in the unified COPYRIGHT file, as they come from PolarSSL originally: lib/libalpm/base64.{c,h} lib/libalpm/md5.{c,h} lib/libalpm/sha2.{c,h} Finally, this one is probably misleading and needs fixing anyway, as we have borrowed the code from rpm but didn't seem to preserve the copyright: lib/libalpm/version.c -Dan

Allan McRae

2:20 a.m.

New subject: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

On 21/01/15 11:06, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Daniel Micay wrote:

...
On 20/01/15 06:38 PM, Dan McGee wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...
On 21/01/15 04:26, Robin de Rooij wrote:

...
From 749dde01efdde4c69491c36c1244a112de54ce52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin de Rooij Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:36:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Changed copyright to 2006 - 2015 in version info

The copyright notice still displayed: 2006 - 2014. I changed the version method to 2006 - 2015

This needs to be part of a larger patch that changes all our copyright years to the correct range.

We go through this seemingly silly exercise every year. Is it truly necessary?

AFAIK, it does have meaning (extends the lifetime of the copyright, which expires N years after that date) but nothing stops you from treating the entire project as one work and only having a top-level license + copyright headers.

Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear here - I meant the "update every file" exercise, not the "we should extend the copyright dates somewhere" bit.

At a minimum, alpm.h and alpm_list.h need a full copyright. I'd prefer that we added a make rule that does it automatically - many of the GNU toolchain software have done this. Allan

3388

Age (days ago)

3389

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

7 comments

5 participants

participants (5)

Allan McRae
Dan McGee
Daniel Micay
Florian Pritz
Robin de Rooij