Re: daitch_mokotoff module
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: daitch_mokotoff module |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 53185f47-ed08-12ef-83d1-0cd26d49a209@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: daitch_mokotoff module (Dag Lem <dag@nimrod.no>) |
Ответы |
Re: daitch_mokotoff module
(Dag Lem <dag@nimrod.no>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/8/23 15:31, Dag Lem wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > >> On 2023-Jan-17, Dag Lem wrote: >> >>> + * Daitch-Mokotoff Soundex >>> + * >>> + * Copyright (c) 2021 Finance Norway >>> + * Author: Dag Lem <dag@nimrod.no> >> >> Hmm, I don't think we accept copyright lines that aren't "PostgreSQL >> Global Development Group". Is it okay to use that, and update the year >> to 2023? (Note that answering "no" very likely means your patch is not >> candidate for inclusion.) Also, we tend not to have "Author:" lines. >> > > You'll have to forgive me for not knowing about this rule: > > grep -ER "Copyright.*[0-9]{4}" contrib/ | grep -v PostgreSQL > > In any case, I have checked with the copyright owner, and it would be OK > to assign the copyright to "PostgreSQL Global Development Group". > I'm not entirely sure what's the rule either, and I'm a committer. My guess is these cases are either old and/or adding a code that already existed elsewhere (like some of the double metaphone, for example), or maybe both. But I'd bet we'd prefer not adding more ... > To avoid going back and forth with patches, how do you propose that the > sponsor and the author of the contributed module should be credited? > Woule something like this be acceptable? > We generally credit contributors in two ways - by mentioning them in the commit message, and by listing them in the release notes (for individual features). > /* > * Daitch-Mokotoff Soundex > * > * Copyright (c) 2023, PostgreSQL Global Development Group > * > * This module was sponsored by Finance Norway / Trafikkforsikringsforeningen > * and implemented by Dag Lem <dag@nimrod.no> > * > ... > > [...] > >> >> We don't keep a separate copyright statement in the file; rather we >> assume that all files are under the PostgreSQL license, which is in the >> COPYRIGHT file at the top of the tree. Changing it thus has the side >> effect that these disclaim notes refer to the University of California >> rather than "the Author". IANAL. > > OK, no problem. Note that you will again find counterexamples under > contrib/ (and in some other places): > > grep -R "Permission to use" . > >> I think we should add SPDX markers to all the files we distribute: >> /* SPDX-License-Identifier: PostgreSQL */ >> >> https://spdx.dev/ids/ >> https://spdx.org/licenses/PostgreSQL.html > > As far as I can tell, this is not included in any file so far, and is > thus better left to decide and implement by someone else. > I don't think Alvaro was suggesting this patch should do that. It was more a generic comment about what the project as a whole might do. regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:
Предыдущее
От: David RowleyДата:
Сообщение: Re: Can we do something to help stop users mistakenly using force_parallel_mode?