Policy for applying copyright notices

[Doron Fediuck]

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 at 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.
-- 

/d

"The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind" --Bob Dylan, Blowin' in the Wind (1963)