Re: consolidate btrfs checksumming, repair and bio splitting

David Sterba
2022-10-24T18:45:42Z

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 11:25:04AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 10/24/22 10:44 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 08:12:29AM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> >> David, what's your plan to progress with this series?
> >
> > FYI, I object to merging any of my code into btrfs without a proper
> > copyright notice, and I also need to find some time to remove my
> > previous significant changes given that the btrfs maintainer
> > refuses to take the proper and legally required copyright notice.
> >
> > So don't waste any of your time on this.
>
> Christoph's request is well within the norms for the kernel, given that
> he's making substantial changes to these files. I talked this over with
> GregKH, who pointed me at:
>
> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/blog/copyright-notices-in-open-source-software-projects
>
> Even if we'd taken up some of the other policies suggested by this doc,
> I'd still defer to preferences of developers who have made significant
> changes.

I've asked for recommendations or best practice similar to the SPDX
process. Something that TAB can acknowledge and that is perhaps also
consulted with lawyers. And understood within the linux project,
not just that some dudes have an argument because it's all clear as mud
and people are used to do things differently.

The link from linux foundation blog is nice but unless this is codified
into the process it's just somebody's blog post. Also there's a paragraph
about "Why not list every copyright holder?" that covers several points
why I don't want to do that.

But, if TAB says so I will do, perhaps spending hours of unproductive
time looking up the whole history of contributors and adding year, name,
company whatever to files.