Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: copyright attribution clarifications

[Raymond Jennings <shentino@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1758 bytes --]

My personal opinion is that rsync should eventually be retired for the tree.

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:12 PM William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 09:20:52AM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 06:04:00PM -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 9:48 AM William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The GLEP says about the "Simplified Attribution":
> > >
> > > > Projects using this scheme must track authorship in a VCS, unless
> they list all authors of copyrightable contributions in an AUTHORS file.
> > >
> > > Would it be acceptable on your side to be listed in the AUTHORS file
> > > (which as far as I know has not been created yet)?
> >
> > I will get this answer today once I get to the office.
> >
> > There was also talk about adding a tag to commits that listed the
> > copyright holder for that commit but it never went anywhere. I would
> > propose something like:
> >
> > Copyright: <copyright notice>
>
> Putting the copyright notice in the commits might be the way to do this.
> If that's what we want, I suggest something like my example above.
>
> > > I'd be perfectly happy to ship an AUTHORS file in the ebuild repo that
> > > contains the names and emails of everyone and every company that has
> > > contributed to the repo.
> >
> > We probably should do this anyway and ship the AUTHORS file as part of
> > the rsync repository. You don't need it for the git repo since the
> > information is available via VCS.
>
> The AUTHORS file will contain AUTHORS, not copyright holders.  Usually
> they are the same, but not always.
>
> So, I guess the question becomes, what do we want to do for Copyright
> holders in the the rsync repository?
>
> William
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2320 bytes --]