Re: BSD advertizing clause in some files
От | Neil Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BSD advertizing clause in some files |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4605D749.6090407@samurai.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BSD advertizing clause in some files (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BSD advertizing clause in some files
Re: BSD advertizing clause in some files |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Someone has pointed out that the following files have the 4-part BSD > copyright, which includes the advertising clause: > > src/backend/port/darwin/system.c > src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c > src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c > src/backend/port/dynloader/netbsd.c > src/backend/utils/mb/wstrcmp.c > src/backend/utils/mb/wstrncmp.c > src/port/strtoul.c > src/port/getopt.c > src/port/getopt_long.c > src/port/inet_aton.c > src/port/strtol.c > src/port/snprintf.c > contrib/pgcrypto/blf.c > contrib/pgcrypto/blf.h > > Because Berkeley has said the advertising clause is to be > ignored/removed, should we remove it from our files too? > I don't think we *need* to remove it, but I agree we should remove it for the sake of clarity. Note that the UC declaration only applies to code that is copyright UC Berkeley -- which is most of the above files, but not all of them (e.g. blf.c and blf.h are copyright Niels Provos). Rather than removing the copyright clause per se, it might be better to just update to the latest versions of these files in an upstream source (e.g. NetBSD). They've already gone through their source tree and updated the Berkeley copyrights as appropriate. -Neil
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: