Re: Policy for applying copyright notices

On Sunday 23 October 2011 20:01:33 Livnat Peer wrote: > On 10/23/2011 07:31 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> On 10/23/2011 08:37 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote: >>> On 10/22/2011 01:18 PM, Livnat Peer wrote: >>>> I personally rather dropping the [name of copyright owner] I believe >>>> that's why we have history in the source control. >>> >>> That is also fine. >>> >>> Note that if a file is brought to the project it is considered bad form >>> to strip the copyright notice, so over time we will get a collection of >>> files with notices and without over time if code is re-used from other >>> OSS projects. >> >> Are we talking about dropping the copyright line or an authors line? >> For instance: >> >> * Copyright International Business Machines, 2011 >> * Authors: >> * Anthony Liguori<aliguori(a)us.ibm.com> >> >> Having a person's name in the file is useful in terms of asking >> questions. Yes, git exists but not everything deals with git trees. >> >> If we're talking about stripping the Copyright line, that's not going to >> be allowed some corporate legal departments. People copy files between >> projects so preserving the copyright notice is pretty important. >> >> Regards, >> >> Anthony Liguori >> > > I was referring to the author. > One person is adding the file and many others are changing it. Many > times (after a while) the file has little to do with the original file > that was added. > > So for questions about the file you usually need to deal with the info > from the source control. > > Livnat > WRT to omitting the person name (from past experience...), After a year or so people change positions / work places, and this becomes simply an old memory, with the relevant person not longer available to answer questions, so this is missing the point.