On 18/03/18 18:36, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > 2018-03-18 19:12 GMT+01:00, Mark Thompson <s...@jkqxz.net>: >> On 16/03/18 15:06, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >>> 2018-03-16 8:33 GMT+01:00, dylanf...@gmail.com <dylanf...@gmail.com>: >>>> From: drfer3 <drf...@student.monash.edu> >>> >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/libavfilter/opencl/avgblur.cl >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@ >>>> +/* >>>> + * This file is part of FFmpeg. >>> >>> Please add your name. >> >> Is there some specific reason for wanting it in this case? > > Nothing specifically, it is just a good idea. > (You may even interpret it as an insurance.)
Insurance? >> I prefer not to add it and would weakly encourage others >> not to (though I realise that many people do like to add it), > > Sounds like a really horrible suggestion and I wonder > where you got it from. > >> because it is often inaccurate when multiple people >> touch a file. > > So you argue that because some people did not add > their copyright statements (because they know it is not > necessary) we should forbid contributors to add them? No, I'm not arguing for anything, and I definitely don't want to forbid it (I'm unsure how you got that from what I said). I was just wondering if there was any specific reason why you were encouraging it in this case (I don't think I've seen you ask for it before, though I admit I wouldn't necessarily notice). >> The only source for anyone actually needing authorship >> information should be the commit history. > > FFmpeg is a superb example for a project where looking > at the commit history is not sufficient to find out about > authorship (this is just to explain that there are different, > not necessarily closely related issues at hand). I agree that this is true for older code in the repository (pre-git in particular). I think we should be discouraging new commits with unclear provenance, though. - Mark _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
