On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 20:17 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I don't think it's fair on those who created abort-ev7.S to go > > > > > throwing a boilerplate copyright on the file which makes it look like > > > > > "Code Aurora Forum." wrote the entire thing. > > > > > > > > You want the license and copyright removed? I can remove them, although > > > > I rather not have too. > > > > > > The fact of the matter is that "Code Aurora Forum" did not create this > > > file, and their copyright does not cover the code which is already there. > > > > Before we discuss it lets just be clear that I've already offered to > > remove the copyright, and license changes.. I've not said that I > > wouldn't do that , in fact I'll make a new pull request now minus those. > > > > > By putting such a boilerplate at the start of the file without some > > > acknowledgement of its past history, they are effectively saying that > > > their copyright extends to everything in the file. That's certainly > > > not the case; take a moment to consider how you'd feel if someone threw > > > their copyright boilerplate on a file you'd written. > > > > There is git history on it. Anyone that looks at the git history would > > know right off we didn't write the whole file. There's nothing stopping > > other copyright holders from adding their copyright on top of ours. > Maybe sane solution is to write "portions copyright"? people will not > dig into git history when there's just one author listed. I tried that in the generic kernel once, and Andrew told me to remove those parts because we had git history for that.. So I don't know, maybe we need to require boiler plate copyrights on all files, and fix ones that don't already have them. Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html