There is no way to do do it consistently for all contributors, it would be a big mess plus it would miss all the history.
If NVIDIA requires it to contribute then I see no harm in having those two lines in certain source files. It is not tracking provenance in any way, it is just a way to allow NVIDIA to check its check marks. Barry > On Sep 6, 2021, at 11:23 PM, Satish Balay <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> 2) NVIDIA's lawyers have some thoughts that we will need to address > > When I saw this is, my thought was: ANL lawyers would be involved here [as > generally employees couldn't respond to legal stuff] > >> git grep Copyright locates some files that are copyrighted by other groups >> (but fit within the BSD license) so I think it is fine to include the NVIDIA >> copyright information in appropriate files. > > My impression here was we are bundling some external stuff [yaml, > abi-compliance-checker, khash, valgrid] - so in some sense they are still > external stuff - not petsc native stuff - where we are to retain their > copyright - as per terms of use. > > So would 'SPDX' be similar module? It wasn't clear to me if - say any current > petsc sources say src/ksp/pc/interface/pcregis.c gets updated as part of this > work - would it also need this copyright update? Perhaps thats ok? > > And if this a policy (for current petsc sources) - we should have to do this > for all contributions to be consistent? > > Satish > > On Mon, 6 Sep 2021, Barry Smith wrote: > >> >> git grep Copyright locates some files that are copyrighted by other groups >> (but fit within the BSD license) so I think it is fine to include the NVIDIA >> copyright information in appropriate files. >> >> We should also add some text to LICENSE indicating certain files have >> additional copyrights indicated at the top of the individual file. >> >> Barry >> >> >>> On Sep 3, 2021, at 7:48 AM, Mark Adams <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> Matthew (cc'ed) and I are going to start working on an AMGx interface in >>> PETSc, PCAMGX, and I suggested that he may want to think about moving the >>> core AMG PC code into PETSC as a built-in PC. >>> >>> 1) We would have to decide of we want the maintenance burden of moving the >>> whole thing in, but we will probably start with a 3rd party library unless >>> this move starts looking like a really good idea. We have not started to >>> really dig into this. >>> >>> 2) NVIDIA's lawyers have some thoughts that we will need to address even >>> with a 3rd party library (I know Hypre has this license notification and >>> LLNL seems happy with what we did). >>> >>> First, Mathew says that this process "can open the door to us helping with >>> PETSc more generally." >>> >>> I will just quote the rest of Mathews' message: >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Mark >>> >>> I can see you don't add license notifications to the headers of the source >>> files, but this tends to be the approach we take for copyright. I'm also >>> not sure there is a very good alternative? >>> >>> Instead of the monolithic copying of the full BSD-2 license with the NVIDIA >>> copyright (which I appreciate might not be desirable), would it be a >>> suitable compromise if we used the SPDX identifier, which looks like: >>> >>> // Copyright (c) 1991-2021, NVIDIA. All rights reserved. >>> // Copyright (c) 1991-2021, UChicago Argonne, LLC and the PETSc Development >>> Team. All rights reserved. >>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-clause >>> >>> This would be for the main source files that we make any significant >>> contributions to or author. I would be interested to hear your thoughts / >>> ideas on this. >>> >> >> >
