From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC681138334 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B8707E0876; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:34:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-f194.google.com (mail-pf0-f194.google.com [209.85.192.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64A19E086E for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:34:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f194.google.com with SMTP id a12-v6so6581082pfi.3 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 19:34:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=jTZ1YfwgympDX8WyMOfIyo1qUltC07thC4GIVcsc2ic=; b=Sx2vk8W0/fkhgI87m1GwaHTcFLRoBgdqIZmD+Ix6YWWL1N8mCW7icSCgNnVxWF8v/G TuXY9TSkTTXwVvXdTv5Tvxl18zq/QRL5JA2LL+yrABG91ggSWaJqHOUJuMMpn7sVgDFJ YnEnq3xcjBsdyJU8BtEe8sd7K7gBRe3KAxfMsCIsPSxguzt1zZ2b7w3ZxdSKXT76APgL 8mW1Jqt2NI3kKw4AxKmBiJbwOvoVNk6jP0h0gf20CxK2uMw+knDRKZAiAQHbVPXEppGK 9lrf3agGUuNpJqKPFip+8Df4WxeCXyqR9ivTP/am6fgrB26rOT6lId29xAXY+IP1cuhQ 3fZA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0an6Fyc2urIdgJUbKj1sJRjzJYGe8r4L4a3ywHoVVaFVZ9Z3XF r6yJdiCYlx9xDVFd0MOx/SPZOvomuZK1HwV+TEKtuw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJsbHAkY7vSdOYLO7Sn+8BVgc7DVKlI505G0mpcg4RIODRiAMZHUFvBM4zphNOerOKpcmoJPrs8vi0uk3+Y/Hc= X-Received: by 2002:a63:6485:: with SMTP id y127-v6mr6622359pgb.126.1529202879222; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 19:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <23325.35685.793702.267278@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20180617123737.122ef070@katipo2.lan> <20180617141436.2745dcaa@katipo2.lan> In-Reply-To: <20180617141436.2745dcaa@katipo2.lan> From: Rich Freeman Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 22:34:27 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] GLEP 76: Copyright Policy To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 9dc1b790-696d-4243-8231-740ba902ea4b X-Archives-Hash: b5dfb350e89f0dce2e2ad5736cd784c5 On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:14 PM Kent Fredric wrote: > > Surely then, the most effective and usefully correct copyright notice > (for portage trees at least), would be: > > "Copyright Gentoo Foundation and Contributors" > > Or similar, instead of abandoning the Gentoo Foundation Copyright and using > a random persons name? Sure, and that is what the policy proposes (except "and others" instead of "and Contributors"), at least for existing stuff that has the Foundation headers. For new stuff it would be the name of the main copyright holder. > If the objective is to simply denote the file has a copyright, that > format should do the job. Sure. It just isn't appropriate for things that the Foundation doesn't hold copyright on, and it caused quite a stir when a large number of notices were stripped from files and replaced with the Foundation, hence the policy. > ( Additionally, I have no opposition to generating a package-wide > file that notates contributors, such an approach is routinely > satisfactory for debian with regards to marking up which files have > which licenses without needing to inject the license in the file, and > has the benefit of exposing that metadata to consumers who only access > via rsync or tarballs, its just in-band in-git data that I find most > obnoxious due to being functionally redundant ) The original policy suggested something like this. IMO git is a lot simpler. I don't see the point in duplicating git info just for the benefit of people who can't be bothered to look at it. -- Rich