On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> 2009/1/20 Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com>: >>> >>> I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all. >> >> There's a difference between contributing a whole file and >> contributing a patch. Patches do not require copyright notices. Whole >> files do. This is not affected by later edits to the file. > > In my comment, I postulated the situation where the patch consisted of > merging in another, independently copyrighted, 'whole file'. Perhaps this > has mostly been a non-existent situation and therefor moot. > > One real situation I was thinking of, unconnected to Google as far as I am > aware, is the case of two third-party IP6 modules and the suggestion that > they be merged into one stdlib module. If that were accomplished by > committing one and merging the other in a patch, it would be unfair (and > untrue) to have just one copyright notice. Of course, in this case, I hope > the two authors work everything out between themselves first before any > submission. There's nothing top stop you from having multiple copyrights in one file, when that represents the rights of the original authors fairly. > I completely understand about strongly preferring programming to lawyer > consultation ;-). -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4