Michael Jakl wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 08:54, Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]> wrote: >> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: >>> Note : We also have to use the same @author tags everywhere. >>> SSHd uses : >>> @author <a href="mailto:[email protected]";>Apache MINA SSHD Project</a> >>> >>> FtpServer uses : >>> @author The Apache MINA Project ([email protected]) >>> >>> MINA uses : >>> @author The Apache MINA Project ([email protected]) >>> >>> AsyncWeb still have personal author's tags like : >>> @author <a href="mailto:[email protected]";>Adrian Sutton</a> >>> >>> In this case, we have to do three things : >>> 1) check that those authors are Apache committers >>> 2) check that the code was either committed as a part of the project or >>> as a part of an ASL 2.0 compliant project >>> 3) if they are external (ie, ASL 2.0 compliant license project), then we >>> have to check that the notice.txt contains the correct attribution >> For 2) and 3), where the origin of the code is not at the ASF covered by >> and *CLA, my understanding is that there should be either an IP grant on >> file or a corresponding JIRA with a checked ASF-license box. >> >> Nevertheless, the author tags could be removed altogether, because they >> are not a copyright (the original author retains copyright anyway, it is >> irrevokable AFAIK) or a licensing statement. > > I was to support your suggestion, but after a second thought the > author tag might have a benefit. Since everybody has the right to copy > and use the code, it could be all over the internet, with the author > tag it's clear where the code comes from (even if Google points to > some class deep down the hierachy).
Actually, it already _is_ all over the internet (at least for the MINA case :-). I intended to refer to _individual_ author tags, not the ML author tag, which I think is should stay. > On the other hand, removing redundancies (since it's the same > information everywhere) is also a good thing. > >>> In any case, we should use the same tag formet (SSHd format ios probably >>> more convenient, if we consider Javadoc). >> +1 > > [email protected] is a mailinglist, so it *might* not be the best > address to add without further notice (how to subscribe to it for > example). It isn't possible to send a mail to [email protected] > without subscribing, is it? It is possible, but the posting won't go through directly, it is subject to moderation. That's how most m...@asf work. > I'd propose something like this: > > @author <a href="http://mina.apache.org";>Apache MINA Project</a> > > At the homepage is everything one could possibly need (source, > documentation, and contact information). I don't know if it's better > to point to the subproject or not, though. Maybe there have already been extensive discussions about this in the past, but we should give that a second thought. The website will stay, while mailing lists for projects (sometimes) change, as projects grow and MLs are forked. Essentially, I am fine with both approaches. Bernd
