Dear Stephen Warren, In message <[email protected]> you wrote: > On 04/24/2016 04:20 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Dear Stephen, > > > > In message <[email protected]> you > > wrote: > >> > >> /* > >> + * Copyright 2011-2016 NVIDIA Corporation > >> * (C) Copyright 2009 SAMSUNG Electronics > >> * Minkyu Kang <[email protected]> > >> * Jaehoon Chung <[email protected]> > >> - * Portions Copyright 2011-2015 NVIDIA Corporation > >> * > >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > >> */ > > > > Both the change of the position of the copyright note and the > > rewording contain a subtle but still significant change of meaning. > > > > Now it seems as if Nvidia was the major copyright holder. Is this > > intentional? > > I was not aware that the order actually implied anything. I would > imagine the copyright dates and "git blame" output were more relevant > since they pin-point specific changes, whereas copyright headers don't > have the detail to convey the whole picture.
Well, just read the text before and after the patch, and let the meaning sink in... > In this case, both "git log" and "git blame" certainly show that NVIDIA > is the primary author of this code. I deliberately removed "Portions" > because it was something uncommon and seems inaccurate. I don't recall > why I changed the order; probably because I was editing a lot of files > and just happened to paste the message there. I imagine the Samsung > copyright notice is only there because the general structure of the file > (set of functions implemented) was based on an existing driver, rather > than because any of the non-boilerplate code was written by them. I did not check this, and I don't intend to do so. you may actually be right, and your modification may be perfectly OK. But from just reading the patch, it leaves a stale aftertaste. > Unfortunately we've (NVIDIA at least) been a little lax making sure the > NVIDIA copyright messages are kept up-to-date when editing files, hence > why this series had to change a lot of them for the first time recently. > If we went back and re-wrote all of git history paying strict attention > to the copyright notice dates and formatting, I imagine the set of > copyright-related changes in this series would be much smaller. It is difficult for any outside party to verify this. I feel such changes require a lot of tact, and global edits are probably not a good idea. You know that I don't post very often lately, so you can imagine that this must have stirred me a bit. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email protected] NOTE: The Most Fundamental Particles in This Product Are Held Together by a "Gluing" Force About Which Little is Currently Known and Whose Adhesive Power Can Therefore Not Be Permanently Guaranteed. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
