Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > John Darrington (2016-08-28 15:41 +0300) wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 12:20:45PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote: >> > +(define-public aspell-dict-de >> > + (aspell-dictionary "de" "German" >> > + #:version "20030222-1" >> > + #:sha256 >> > + (base32 >> > + >> "01p92qj66cqb346gk7hjfynaap5sbcn85xz07kjfdq623ghr8v5s"))) >> don't forget your copyright line. Otherwise looks good. >> >> I didn't forget. But I don't consider these 6 lines to be in any respect >> novel, creative or original. The FSF guidelines for what is regarded as >> "legally significant" for copyright purposes mentions the limit of 15 lines. >> >> In fact, I challenge anyone to offer a definition of aspell-dict-de which >> works in Guix AND satisfies our rather strict coding style, and does not >> differ from the above, except in whitespace. >> >> In other words, there is nothing novel or creative in what I have written. >> Thus, is would be dishonest (perhaps illegal?) for me to claim copyright on >> this work. > > I think this patch deserves it. My understanding is we just don't have > a policy on adding copyright lines: some people add a copyright line > even for a simple package update.
John is right; simple package updates are not legally significant either. But then I think “too many” copyright lines is better than not enough, and it’s not worth bothering. Ludo’.
