Open Stack

On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 12:34 -0600, John Griffith wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 08/16/2012 01:12 PM, John Griffith wrote:
> >> Hey Everyone,
> >>
> >> A while back there was some discussion taking place in the PPB
> >> meetings regarding copyright headers.  There was some concern as I
> >> recall from lawyers regarding the addition of assigning Copyright to
> >> Openstack LLC etc. (don't ask me, I'm not a lawyer).
> >>
> >> I was wondering if there was ever a solid decision on how we wanted to
> >> proceed with header files?  Are we just including the Apache header,
> >> both or some other form?  Did I misinterpret the topic that was being
> >> discussed?
> >
> > First of all, IANAL.  :-)
> >
> > I think many cases of people leaving the following at the top of a new
> > file is due to just copying it from another file:
> >
> >     # Copyright (c) 2011 OpenStack, LLC.
> >
> > IMO, whenever someone creates a new file, or makes substantial /
> > non-trivial changes or additions to a file, your name (or the name of
> > your employer, if they own the copyright to your work) should be placed
> > at or added to the top of the file.  I usually forget when I'm changing
> > existing files, but am going to try to be better about remembering.

Same here.

> Cool... good info thanks Monty and Russell.
> 
> So I have a specific example now that I can use :)
> 
> A contributor noticed that a number of files in the source tree have
> *NO* header whatsoever.  So, they did a global search and add of the
> copyright Openstack and Apache license on all files that didn't have
> it.  Granted most of these are empty __init__ files, and the general
> answer from most is probably *who cares*.  Seems like this is the
> right way to go, but wanted to make sure.

I'd be wary of retrospectively adding copyright headers to files. Who's
to say the header you add accurately reflects the ownership of any
copyrightable material? And surely no copyright header is better than an
inaccurate one?

Empty files without a copyright header doesn't seem like an issue to me.

> Sorry if this seems like a silly question to be asking, but I think we
> should have some sort of consistent guidance/rule here.

Feel free to create a new proposal here:

  http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/

and the PPB can rubber stamp it.

I think the guidance would simply be:

  - always include an Apache License 2.0 notice

  - if you're copying an existing file, retain the existing copyright 
    headers

  - if you substantially modify a file, add your own copyright header

  - if you're unsure what copyright header is appropriate in your case, 
    seek your own legal advice. It may name you personally or your 
    employer, depending on the circumstances.

Cheers,
Mark.