db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kristian Waagan <Kristian.Waa...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Copyright notice in the source file header
Date Tue, 08 May 2007 08:31:30 GMT
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
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message