Open Stack

On 10/20/2013 09:00 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2013-10-20 22:20:25 +1300 (+1300), Robert Collins wrote:
> [...]
>> OTOH registering one's nominated copyright holder on the first
>> patch to a repository is probably a sustainable overhead. And it's
>> probably amenable to automation - a commit hook could do it locally
>> and a check job can assert that it's done.
> 
> I know the Foundation's got work underway to improve the affiliate
> map from the member database, so it might be possible to have some
> sort of automated job which proposes changes to a copyright holders
> list in each project by running a query with the author and date of
> each commit looking for new affiliations. That seems like it would
> be hacky, fragile and inaccurate, but probably still more reliable
> than expecting thousands of contributors to keep that information up
> to date when submitting patches?

My request wasn't to go *THAT* far. The main problem I was facing was
that troveclient has a few files stating that HP was the sole copyright
holder, when it clearly was not (since I have discussed a bit with some
the dev team in Portland, IIRC some of them are from Rackspace...).

Just writing HP as copyright holder to please the FTP masters because it
would match some of the source content, then seemed wrong to me, which
is why I raised the topic. Also, they didn't like that I list the
authors (from a "git log" output) in the copyright files.

So, for me, the clean and easy way to fix this problem is to have a
simple copyright-holder.txt file, containing a list of company or
individuals. It doesn't really mater if some entities forget to write
themselves in. After all, that'd be their fault, no? The point is, at
least I'd have an upstream source file to show to the FTP masters as
something which has a chance to be a bit more accurate than
second-guessing through "git log" or reading a few source code files
which represent a wrong view of the reality.

Any thoughts?

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

P.S: I asked the FTP masters to write in this thread, though it seems
nobody had time to do so...