From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26616 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2004 14:54:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26600 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2004 14:54:32 -0000 Message-ID: <407567A2.3040106@eCosCentric.com> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:54:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030703 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Alex Schuilenburg , eCos Maintainers Subject: Re: [ECOS] Re: eCosCentric copyright hold in headers References: <20040408101602.GJ29940@lunn.ch> <4075305D.8020101@eCosCentric.com> <20040408111939.GK29940@lunn.ch> <407556D4.8080407@ecoscentric.com> <40755B58.30905@eCosCentric.com> <20040408142145.GL29940@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20040408142145.GL29940@lunn.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 Andrew Lunn wrote: > Should we propose what the new banner looks like? > > Is the basic format of the current banner OK? I'd like it to be changed actually. Some of the information parts of the banner are _very_ frequently poorly maintained and/or inaccurate and do us a disservice. I think the Authors/Contributors bits are ambiguous; and the Purpose/Description ditto. It's never really been clear what Date the Date is for. I think I fill these in more than most people, but still rarely. Contributions very frequently have inaccurate fields here, most annoyingly the author. I think something like the following fields would be better/clearer: Maintained by: Contributors: Derived from: --- ChangeLog 2004-04-08 16:12:54.000000000 +0200 > +++ ChangeLog.new 2004-04-08 16:17:45.000000000 +0200 > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > // ------------------------------------------- > // This file is part of eCos, the Embedded Configurable Operating System. > // Copyright (C) 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 Red Hat, Inc. > +// Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > // > // eCos is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under > // the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free > @@ -26,9 +27,6 @@ > // > // This exception does not invalidate any other reasons why a work based on > // this file might be covered by the GNU General Public License. > -// > -// Alternative licenses for eCos may be arranged by contacting Red Hat, Inc. > -// at http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/ecos-license/ > // ------------------------------------------- > //####ECOSGPLCOPYRIGHTEND#### > //=========================================================================== > > The last bit clearly wants to go since its not been true for a long > while. Absolutely. We just didn't want to touch every file multiple times. People doing "cvs update" won't like us otherwise :-). > Should the original RedHat Copyright line be deleted as well? I guess > leaving it could confuse people into thinking the files are still > copyright RedHat as well as being FSF.. When the assignment is properly made the RH copyright _must_ disappear in fact. I have a script that munges file headers, that was used in the RHEPL->GPL change and other changes before that. It's horrible as it has evolved piecemeal over time so it's a real hacky mess so I don't want to publicise it here :-). It deals with all the various comment characters ( /* */ versus // versus # versus ; versus dnl versus ) and differing licenses though (BSD stack, host tools, etc.) IIRC. A perl wizard may be able to do a better job quite quickly though, especially if we're to munge the other header fields too - this is one of the things perl is good at. Jifl -- eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts --["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine