You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM> on 2007/05/07 11:59:09 UTC
Copyright notice in the source file header
Hello,
When reviewing a patch I became unsure if the source file header should
include a copyright notice or not. I see that we have both in our repos.
According to some people I talked with, the copyright notice with dates
(years) should not be included. But, looking at
http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new and
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply, it is clearly
stated that a copyright notice should be included.
Have we decided not to include the copyright notice?
Can anyone clarify this for me?
thanks,
--
Kristian
Re: Copyright notice in the source file header
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Kristian Waagan wrote:
> Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>> Kristian Waagan wrote:
>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> When reviewing a patch I became unsure if the source file header should
>>>> include a copyright notice or not. I see that we have both in our
>>>> repos.
>>
>> which files in the repo now have copyrights?
>
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobAsciiStream.java
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBOutputStream.java
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBInputStream.java
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobUtf8Writer.java
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBStreamControl.java
> M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobStreamControl.java
> M
> java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/storetests/st_derby1939.java
>
> M
> java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/jdbc4/BlobSetMethodsTest.java
>
> M
> java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/jdbc4/LobStreamTest.java
>
> Most of these are recent additions (one is from October 2006).
>
> I removed the nine copyright (all Apache) lines in commit 536122.
> I found no copyright lines in 10.2.
>
> Is this okay, or do the people who actually wrote the code have to do it?
It's fine for any Derby committer to correct the Apache header.
We need to be careful with any non-Apache copyrights in contributed
files. Those have to be removed by the "copyright owner (or owner's
agent)" [1].
-jean
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
Re: Copyright notice in the source file header
Posted by Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM>.
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> resending from the subscribed address (sorry for dup).
>
> Kristian Waagan wrote:
>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> When reviewing a patch I became unsure if the source file header should
>>> include a copyright notice or not. I see that we have both in our repos.
>
>
> which files in the repo now have copyrights?
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobAsciiStream.java
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBOutputStream.java
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBInputStream.java
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobUtf8Writer.java
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/LOBStreamControl.java
M java/engine/org/apache/derby/impl/jdbc/ClobStreamControl.java
M
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/storetests/st_derby1939.java
M
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/jdbc4/BlobSetMethodsTest.java
M
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/jdbc4/LobStreamTest.java
Most of these are recent additions (one is from October 2006).
I removed the nine copyright (all Apache) lines in commit 536122.
I found no copyright lines in 10.2.
Is this okay, or do the people who actually wrote the code have to do it?
--
Kristian
> 10.2 and forward should
> adhere to this policy:
>
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>
> 10.1 and earlier adhere to the old policy, which included an Apache
> copyright line on each source file. --That's fine. If we were to do a
> new 10.1 release, which seems unlikely, then we would have to update
> everything to conform to the new header.
>
>
>>> According to some people I talked with, the copyright notice with dates
>>> (years) should not be included. But, looking at
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new and
>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply, it is clearly
>>> stated that a copyright notice should be included.
>>>
>>> Have we decided not to include the copyright notice?
>>> Can anyone clarify this for me?
>
>
> Current policy says to not include the copyright line per-file and to
> include the header on this page:
>
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>
> The apply-license.html file hasn't been updated yet, but nags are being
> sent semi-regularly to legal-discuss [1].
>
> If new copyrights (i.e., non-Apache) are being included in a patch, then
> let's be sure to discuss case-by-case.
>
> -jean
>
> [1]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200704.mbox/%3cEFE326C4-415A-42F5-8F22-BAE1BA426425@SUN.com%3e
>
>
>
Re: Copyright notice in the source file header
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
resending from the subscribed address (sorry for dup).
Kristian Waagan wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> When reviewing a patch I became unsure if the source file header should
>> include a copyright notice or not. I see that we have both in our repos.
which files in the repo now have copyrights? 10.2 and forward should
adhere to this policy:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
10.1 and earlier adhere to the old policy, which included an Apache
copyright line on each source file. --That's fine. If we were to do a
new 10.1 release, which seems unlikely, then we would have to update
everything to conform to the new header.
>> According to some people I talked with, the copyright notice with dates
>> (years) should not be included. But, looking at
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new and
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply, it is clearly
>> stated that a copyright notice should be included.
>>
>> Have we decided not to include the copyright notice?
>> Can anyone clarify this for me?
Current policy says to not include the copyright line per-file and to
include the header on this page:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
The apply-license.html file hasn't been updated yet, but nags are being
sent semi-regularly to legal-discuss [1].
If new copyrights (i.e., non-Apache) are being included in a patch, then
let's be sure to discuss case-by-case.
-jean
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200704.mbox/%3cEFE326C4-415A-42F5-8F22-BAE1BA426425@SUN.com%3e