Copyright statements in _empty_ files
I'm not generally advocating removing copyright statements from source files. If the author(s) put them in, then it's (at least) rude to take them out without permission, and getting permission from thousands of contributors would be a pain. But there's one particular case that drives me nuts. We have source code files that contain _only_ a copyright statement, and no actual content to assert copyright over. (I'm not talking about NOTICE files that exist to hold copyright statements; I'm talking about zero-byte __init__.py files that exist to mark a directory as a Python package.) You can't copyright a zero-byte file; there's no original creative content there. And, because the copyright blurb makes the file's size nonzero, people waste time reading it to look for code. Anyone object to me emptying source files that contain no code, just copyright statements and boilerplate vim/emacs comments? -- David Ripton Red Hat dripton@redhat.com
On 05/15/2013 06:51 AM, David Ripton wrote:
I'm not generally advocating removing copyright statements from source files. If the author(s) put them in, then it's (at least) rude to take them out without permission, and getting permission from thousands of contributors would be a pain.
But there's one particular case that drives me nuts. We have source code files that contain _only_ a copyright statement, and no actual content to assert copyright over. (I'm not talking about NOTICE files that exist to hold copyright statements; I'm talking about zero-byte __init__.py files that exist to mark a directory as a Python package.) You can't copyright a zero-byte file; there's no original creative content there. And, because the copyright blurb makes the file's size nonzero, people waste time reading it to look for code.
Anyone object to me emptying source files that contain no code, just copyright statements and boilerplate vim/emacs comments?
I do not object to that.
I certainly don't object myself, but I'd suggest reaching out directly to the authors of those files and asking why they bothered (if only to avoid having someone trying to restore those copyright notices later on). -Dolph On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:51 AM, David Ripton <dripton@redhat.com> wrote:
I'm not generally advocating removing copyright statements from source files. If the author(s) put them in, then it's (at least) rude to take them out without permission, and getting permission from thousands of contributors would be a pain.
But there's one particular case that drives me nuts. We have source code files that contain _only_ a copyright statement, and no actual content to assert copyright over. (I'm not talking about NOTICE files that exist to hold copyright statements; I'm talking about zero-byte __init__.py files that exist to mark a directory as a Python package.) You can't copyright a zero-byte file; there's no original creative content there. And, because the copyright blurb makes the file's size nonzero, people waste time reading it to look for code.
Anyone object to me emptying source files that contain no code, just copyright statements and boilerplate vim/emacs comments?
-- David Ripton Red Hat dripton@redhat.com
______________________________**_________________ legal-discuss mailing list legal-discuss@lists.openstack.**org <legal-discuss@lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**legal-discuss<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss>
On 05/15/2013 09:51 AM, David Ripton wrote:
I'm not generally advocating removing copyright statements from source files. If the author(s) put them in, then it's (at least) rude to take them out without permission, and getting permission from thousands of contributors would be a pain.
But there's one particular case that drives me nuts. We have source code files that contain _only_ a copyright statement, and no actual content to assert copyright over. (I'm not talking about NOTICE files that exist to hold copyright statements; I'm talking about zero-byte __init__.py files that exist to mark a directory as a Python package.) You can't copyright a zero-byte file; there's no original creative content there. And, because the copyright blurb makes the file's size nonzero, people waste time reading it to look for code.
Anyone object to me emptying source files that contain no code, just copyright statements and boilerplate vim/emacs comments?
No objection, however can you write a hacking enforcer for it first? Having hacking be able to enforce on future commits really reduces mental load on review. Having policy that's not code enforced means we end up being somewhat inconsistent. I also think this needs to be a -dev discussion, this list is a little small for finding the folks that might object. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net
participants (4)
-
David Ripton
-
Dolph Mathews
-
Monty Taylor
-
Sean Dague