Re: [HACKERS] Copyright in partition.h and partition.c

[Daniel Gustafsson]

> On 06 Sep 2017, at 02:56, Amit Langote  wrote:
> 
> On 2017/09/05 21:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Amit Langote  writes:
>>> On 2017/09/05 15:48, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
 Here is the copyright in partition.h:
 
  * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
 
 I think it's reasonable that that matches the copyright in partition.c,
 but partition.c has:
 
  * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
 
 Is that intentional?
>> 
>>> No, it's unintentional.  The difference may have resulted from copying
>>> different files to become partition.h and partition.c, respectively.
>> 
>>> Maybe, we should change both to say 2016-2017?
>> 
>>> I don't know the exact rule for how we determine those years.  Is there
>>> some rule in place about that?  When I look at execParallel.c, which
>>> supposedly got introduced into the tree recently, I see 1996-2017.  OTOH,
>>> the files in contrib/bloom all have 2016-2017.
>> 
>> Our usual practice is to write the copyright like it is in partition.c
>> even in new files.  This avoids any question about whether any of the
>> code was copied-and-pasted from somewhere else in PG.  Even if not one
>> word in the file can be traced to code that was somewhere else before,
>> it seems to me that this is an appropriate thing to do, to give due
>> credit to those who came before us.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> In short: we should make partition.h's copyright look like partition.c's
>> not vice versa.
> 
> Attached patch does that.

This reminded me that I’d seen one of these before while hacking, and with some
grep and xargs abuse I spotted one more (there might be more that my command
line fu didn’t catch though).  Attached could perhaps be included with the
above patch?

Perhaps the copyright script should be expanded to catch these?  (and I
volunteer to attempt that unless it’s deemed an uninteresting feature)

cheers ./daniel



header_copyright.patch
Description: Binary data

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Copyright in partition.h and partition.c

[Amit Langote]

On 2017/09/05 21:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote  writes:
>> On 2017/09/05 15:48, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>> Here is the copyright in partition.h:
>>>
>>>  * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>>>
>>> I think it's reasonable that that matches the copyright in partition.c,
>>> but partition.c has:
>>>
>>>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>>>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
>>>
>>> Is that intentional?
> 
>> No, it's unintentional.  The difference may have resulted from copying
>> different files to become partition.h and partition.c, respectively.
> 
>> Maybe, we should change both to say 2016-2017?
> 
>> I don't know the exact rule for how we determine those years.  Is there
>> some rule in place about that?  When I look at execParallel.c, which
>> supposedly got introduced into the tree recently, I see 1996-2017.  OTOH,
>> the files in contrib/bloom all have 2016-2017.
> 
> Our usual practice is to write the copyright like it is in partition.c
> even in new files.  This avoids any question about whether any of the
> code was copied-and-pasted from somewhere else in PG.  Even if not one
> word in the file can be traced to code that was somewhere else before,
> it seems to me that this is an appropriate thing to do, to give due
> credit to those who came before us.

Agreed.

> In short: we should make partition.h's copyright look like partition.c's
> not vice versa.

Attached patch does that.

Thanks,
Amit
diff --git a/src/include/catalog/partition.h b/src/include/catalog/partition.h
index 2283c675e9..619e4c9cc8 100644
--- a/src/include/catalog/partition.h
+++ b/src/include/catalog/partition.h
@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@
  * Header file for structures and utility functions related to
  * partitioning
  *
- * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
+ * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
+ * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
  *
  * src/include/catalog/partition.h
  *

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Copyright in partition.h and partition.c

[Tom Lane]

Amit Langote  writes:
> On 2017/09/05 15:48, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> Here is the copyright in partition.h:
>> 
>>  * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>> 
>> I think it's reasonable that that matches the copyright in partition.c,
>> but partition.c has:
>> 
>>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
>> 
>> Is that intentional?

> No, it's unintentional.  The difference may have resulted from copying
> different files to become partition.h and partition.c, respectively.

> Maybe, we should change both to say 2016-2017?

> I don't know the exact rule for how we determine those years.  Is there
> some rule in place about that?  When I look at execParallel.c, which
> supposedly got introduced into the tree recently, I see 1996-2017.  OTOH,
> the files in contrib/bloom all have 2016-2017.

Our usual practice is to write the copyright like it is in partition.c
even in new files.  This avoids any question about whether any of the
code was copied-and-pasted from somewhere else in PG.  Even if not one
word in the file can be traced to code that was somewhere else before,
it seems to me that this is an appropriate thing to do, to give due
credit to those who came before us.

In short: we should make partition.h's copyright look like partition.c's
not vice versa.

regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Copyright in partition.h and partition.c

[Amit Langote]

On 2017/09/05 15:48, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Here is the copyright in partition.h:
> 
>  * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
> 
> I think it's reasonable that that matches the copyright in partition.c,
> but partition.c has:
> 
>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
> 
> Is that intentional?

No, it's unintentional.  The difference may have resulted from copying
different files to become partition.h and partition.c, respectively.

Maybe, we should change both to say 2016-2017?

I don't know the exact rule for how we determine those years.  Is there
some rule in place about that?  When I look at execParallel.c, which
supposedly got introduced into the tree recently, I see 1996-2017.  OTOH,
the files in contrib/bloom all have 2016-2017.

Thanks,
Amit



-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Copyright in partition.h and partition.c

[Etsuro Fujita]

Here is the copyright in partition.h:

 * Copyright (c) 2007-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group

I think it's reasonable that that matches the copyright in partition.c, 
but partition.c has:


 * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
 * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California

Is that intentional?

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita



--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers