Re: [PATCH 0/6] Towards a generalized sequencer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Jonathan,

Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>> Note: I didn't know what to do with the license header in the fifth
>> patch.  I just assumed that it was some historical cruft and removed
>> it.
>
> Please don't.  Technically it's allowed by the license if I understand
> correctly (since the copyright notices are not accompanied by a
> disclaimer of warranty) but it's almost always the wrong thing to do
> to remove a copyright notice without the author's permission.

Um, ok.  I still don't know what to do:
1. Should I leave it in builtin/revert.c?  There are only a few tiny
functions left there.
2. Should I move it to sequencer.c and and modify it accordingly?
It'll read Copyright (C) 2011 <Me>, based on builtin/revert.c which is
Copyright Dscho, which in turn is based on git-revert.sh Copyright
Linus and Junio?  Isn't this information redundant? Can't `log` and
`blame -M -C` do a much better job?

Thanks.

-- Ram
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]