On Friday 2007, March 02, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Andy Parkins wrote: > > Here's another similar idea: generating copyright lines. Let's say > > we want to copyright every source file - that means writing "(C) > > Junio, (C) Johannes, etc" at the top of every file. Wouldn't it be > > nicer if we could put $Copyright$ in the file, then have some > > git-blame-like machinery fill in the copyrights automatically based > > on who's made contributions? > > That's a horrible idea. A typo fix is not copyrightable. You'd add > these. An obious fix is not copyrightable. You'd add these cases, > too. Well, I wasn't actually suggesting that as a final solution, it might be that it's done by more than just line count, and that some clever bit of machinery measures real contribution. That wasn't really the point. > Besides, IMHO adding copyright should be a _concious_ act. Well, IMHO, the concious act was the commital of a change. A lot of your objection to this seems to be "IMHO". Fine: you don't like keywords, you wouldn't be /forced/ to use them. I can see a use for them. I'm having a lot of trouble understanding why they are seen as inherently evil. Difficult to implement, I would accept, impractical to make work in git would be fine; but not this hand wavery that there is no conceivable use for them. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@xxxxxxxxx - 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