On 26.10.22 13:41, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 07:36:45 +0000 > Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> [+Cc Steven ] >> >> Steven, you're on the TAB, can you help with this issue? >> Or bring it up with other TAB members? >> > > Well, Chris Mason was recently the TAB chair. > >> Thanks :) >> >> Full quote below for reference: >> >> On 24.10.22 19:11, David Sterba wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 11:25:04AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: >>>> On 10/24/22 10:44 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 08:12:29AM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: >>>>>> David, what's your plan to progress with this series? >>>>> >>>>> FYI, I object to merging any of my code into btrfs without a proper >>>>> copyright notice, and I also need to find some time to remove my >>>>> previous significant changes given that the btrfs maintainer >>>>> refuses to take the proper and legally required copyright notice. >>>>> >>>>> So don't waste any of your time on this. >>>> >>>> Christoph's request is well within the norms for the kernel, given that >>>> he's making substantial changes to these files. I talked this over with >>>> GregKH, who pointed me at: >>>> >>>> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/blog/copyright-notices-in-open-source-software-projects >>>> >>>> Even if we'd taken up some of the other policies suggested by this doc, >>>> I'd still defer to preferences of developers who have made significant >>>> changes. >>> >>> I've asked for recommendations or best practice similar to the SPDX >>> process. Something that TAB can acknowledge and that is perhaps also >>> consulted with lawyers. And understood within the linux project, >>> not just that some dudes have an argument because it's all clear as mud >>> and people are used to do things differently. >>> >>> The link from linux foundation blog is nice but unless this is codified >>> into the process it's just somebody's blog post. Also there's a paragraph >>> about "Why not list every copyright holder?" that covers several points >>> why I don't want to do that. >>> >>> But, if TAB says so I will do, perhaps spending hours of unproductive >>> time looking up the whole history of contributors and adding year, name, >>> company whatever to files. > > There's no requirement to list every copyright holder, as most developers do > not require it for acceptance. The issue I see here is that there's someone > that does require it for you to accept their code. > > The policy is simple. If someone requires a copyright notice for their > code, you simply add it, or do not take their code. You can be specific > about what that code is that is copyrighted. Perhaps just around the code in > question or a description at the top. > > Looking over the thread, I'm still confused at what the issue is. Is it > that if you add one copyright notice you must do it for everyone else? Is > everyone else asking for it? If not, just add the one and be done with it. Thanks a lot Steve.
