[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Felipe Franciosi]

As discussed on the list [1], having a comment stating that this file
is "public domain" is arguably wrong and not legally binding. By
removing this statement from the header, the file is under the
project-wide GPLv2+ license.

[1] http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg06151.html

Signed-off-by: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
---
 include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
index 338d3a6..9d6d09b 100644
--- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
+++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
@@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
-/* public domain */
-
 #ifndef COMPILER_H
 #define COMPILER_H
 
-- 
1.9.5

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Peter Maydell]

On 23 September 2016 at 13:51, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
> As discussed on the list [1], having a comment stating that this file
> is "public domain" is arguably wrong and not legally binding. By
> removing this statement from the header, the file is under the
> project-wide GPLv2+ license.
>
> [1] http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg06151.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
> ---
>  include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> index 338d3a6..9d6d09b 100644
> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
> -/* public domain */
> -
>  #ifndef COMPILER_H
>  #define COMPILER_H

Can we have a comment specifically saying what license it is under,
please? Something like

/* compiler.h: macros to abstract away compiler specifics
 *
 * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or later.
 * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory.
 */

thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Felipe Franciosi]

> On 23 Sep 2016, at 14:24, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> On 23 September 2016 at 13:51, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
>> As discussed on the list [1], having a comment stating that this file
>> is "public domain" is arguably wrong and not legally binding. By
>> removing this statement from the header, the file is under the
>> project-wide GPLv2+ license.
>> 
>> [1] http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg06151.html
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
>> ---
>> include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 --
>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>> index 338d3a6..9d6d09b 100644
>> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
>> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>> @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
>> -/* public domain */
>> -
>> #ifndef COMPILER_H
>> #define COMPILER_H
> 
> Can we have a comment specifically saying what license it is under,
> please? Something like
> 
> /* compiler.h: macros to abstract away compiler specifics
> *
> * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or later.
> * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory.
> */

I'm not against that, but the consensus seems to be that what's currently in LICENSE is clear enough:
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob_plain;f=LICENSE;hb=HEAD

2) ... Source files with no licensing information
are released under the GNU General Public License, version 2 or (at your
option) any later version.

Thanks,
Felipe

> 
> thanks
> -- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Peter Maydell]

On 23 September 2016 at 14:37, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Sep 2016, at 14:24, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 23 September 2016 at 13:51, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
>>> As discussed on the list [1], having a comment stating that this file
>>> is "public domain" is arguably wrong and not legally binding. By
>>> removing this statement from the header, the file is under the
>>> project-wide GPLv2+ license.
>>>
>>> [1] http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg06151.html
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 --
>>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> index 338d3a6..9d6d09b 100644
>>> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
>>> @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
>>> -/* public domain */
>>> -
>>> #ifndef COMPILER_H
>>> #define COMPILER_H
>>
>> Can we have a comment specifically saying what license it is under,
>> please? Something like
>>
>> /* compiler.h: macros to abstract away compiler specifics
>> *
>> * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or later.
>> * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory.
>> */
>
> I'm not against that, but the consensus seems to be that what's currently in LICENSE is clear enough:
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob_plain;f=LICENSE;hb=HEAD
>
> 2) ... Source files with no licensing information
> are released under the GNU General Public License, version 2 or (at your
> option) any later version.

That clause is intended to deal with random leftover files which
don't have an explicit statement for some reason (usually historical),
not as a justification for increasing the number of files without
licensing info. In an ideal world all our files would have a
header comment giving the licensing info and copyright details.

thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] compiler: Drop 'public domain' header from file

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 01:37:18PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote:
> 
> > On 23 Sep 2016, at 14:24, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On 23 September 2016 at 13:51, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com> wrote:
> >> As discussed on the list [1], having a comment stating that this file
> >> is "public domain" is arguably wrong and not legally binding. By
> >> removing this statement from the header, the file is under the
> >> project-wide GPLv2+ license.
> >> 
> >> [1] http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg06151.html
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
> >> ---
> >> include/qemu/compiler.h | 2 --
> >> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/include/qemu/compiler.h b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> index 338d3a6..9d6d09b 100644
> >> --- a/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> +++ b/include/qemu/compiler.h
> >> @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
> >> -/* public domain */
> >> -
> >> #ifndef COMPILER_H
> >> #define COMPILER_H
> > 
> > Can we have a comment specifically saying what license it is under,
> > please? Something like
> > 
> > /* compiler.h: macros to abstract away compiler specifics
> > *
> > * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or later.
> > * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory.
> > */
> 
> I'm not against that, but the consensus seems to be that what's currently in LICENSE is clear enough:
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob_plain;f=LICENSE;hb=HEAD
> 
> 2) ... Source files with no licensing information
> are released under the GNU General Public License, version 2 or (at your
> option) any later version.

That is just a catch all to deal with bad source files. Best practice
is to always have an explicit header in every single file, otherwise
when someone copies a file from your project into another project,
the implicit license info gets lost.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|