On 5/31/2014 2:05 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Am 31.05.14 05:32, schrieb Terry Reedy:
I have two areas of questions about updating turtle.py. First the module
itself, then a turtle tracker issue versus code cleanup policies.
A. Unlike most stdlib modules, turtle is copyrighted and licensed by an
individual.
'''
# turtle.py: a Tkinter based turtle graphics module for Python
# Version 1.1b - 4. 5. 2009
# Copyright (C) 2006 - 2010 Gregor Lingl
# email: gli...@aon.at
'''
I am not sure what the copyright covers other than the exact text
contributed, with updates, by Gregor. It certainly does not cover the
API and whatever code he copied from the previous version (unless that
was also by him, and I have no idea how much he copied when
reimplementing). I don't think it should cover additions made by others
either. Should there be another line to cover these?
He should provide a contributor form, covering his past contributions.
Would you like to contact him about this?
Thank you for the advice. I emailed him about contributor form, change
notice in the file, and maintenance.
Adding a license up-front (as you propose) is counter-productive; the
author may not agree to your specific licensing terms. If he was
unwilling to agree to the contributor form (which I doubt, knowing
him personally), the only option would be to remove the code from the
distribution.
Responding today, I cautioned that clean-up only patches, such as she
apparently would like to start with, are not in favor.
I would not say that. I recall that I asked Gregor to make a number of
style changes before he submitted the code, and eventually agreed to the
code when I thought it was "good enough". However, continuing on that
path sounds reasonable to me.
I am not sure what you mean by 'that path', to be continued on.
It is the mixing of clean-up patches with functional changes that is not
in favor.
What I have understood from Guido is that 'blind' format changes, not
part of working on the file, are not good as they could cause harm
without direct benefit. On the otherhand, you are saying that if the
code is reviewed, then the format changes should be separate, possibly
with a commit note that they are not 'blind'.
Since she only marked the issue for 3.5, I also cautioned that 3.5-only
cleanups would make fixing bugs in other issues harder. Is the code
clean-up policy the same for all branches?
I don't think that we should be taken hostage by merging restrictions
of the DVCS - we switched to the DVCS precisely with the promise that
merging would be easier. Given the number of bug fixes that the turtle
module has seen,
which is miniscule in the last few years... I ran differ on the 3.4 and
3.5 versions of turtle.py and did not see any differences. So at the
moment, forward porting is trivial.
I'd suggest that it is less work to restrict cleanup
to 3.5, and then deal with any forward-porting of bug fixing when it
actually happens.
This would make it non-trivial for any patch hitting a difference.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
