db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject ASL
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:06:03 GMT
I think that a reasonable first-time contributor could be confused by 
Apache's rules for including copyright notices 
(http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new). Apache advises us to 
include a short copyright notice in "each source file (code and 
documentation) but excluding the LICENSE and NOTICE files)". The 
definition of source and documentation is a little vague although it 
seems to include LICENSE and NOTICE files which are immediately and 
happily excluded.

So what constitutes source and documentation? A reasonable person might 
suppose these terms to include every file under various subversion roots 
including https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/code/trunk and 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/trunk. But a quick glance 
at our source tree indicates that this is not what we intend. We don't 
seem to include copyright notices in:

o Localized message files. These really look like a kind of source code 
to me.

o Other properties files used to control configurations and tests.

o Ant build scripts.

o Documentation on how to build and test Derby.

Where do we state our rules about which files require copyright notices? 
Is this the implicit rule:

o Only files with the extension "java" require copyright notices.

Or should a first-time contributor apply some other implicit rules:

o When creating a new subversion controlled file, first look for an 
existing file with the same extension. If the existing file you picked 
has a copyright notice, then include a copyright notice in your new file.

o If your new file has a completely novel extension and there's no 
corresponding file under source control, then do what seems reasonable 
to you.

Mime
View raw message