Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:10:45 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> Cc: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r335042 - head/usr.bin/top Message-ID: <CANCZdfqstc%2BurGqszB%2B=vixJNkc0VJyPVNFV97CwEG7%2BarQhkA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxg=HnK7eRXS0=rW4jxZZTwK5hMbQCUVQy_d=YqQ6biECCg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201806130852.w5D8qKd4094584@repo.freebsd.org> <9b6b26cf-dac2-f5ab-e694-5d132ff1bdb9@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxg=HnK7eRXS0=rW4jxZZTwK5hMbQCUVQy_d=YqQ6biECCg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 6:10 AM, Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> wrote: > > I do see some people adding their Copyright on some commits but overall > > we haven't done that as a project and I am curious if we should change > > in that regard. > > The rule of them is about 25% of the file, right? > The law that motivates this (but maybe not requires it) states only substantial change. One cannot mislead people about the copyright term which also feeds into it (which is one of the motivators for not doing it for trivial changes: it would lead people to believe that a copyright is being claimed that might not be substantial). Trouble is, there's no concrete rules for substantial in the laws, and the caselaw is substantially muddied. People know and use the terms, but there's no sharp line that can be drawn or articulated. Generally, the project has adopted a bit of a Potter Stewart like standard. A substantial change is situational. Generally, a 25% or more change is substantial. Sometimes, substantial changes can be less when important new functions are added. Other times, like with mechanical changes that may lack artistic expression, you can change 90% of the file (via indent) and not have it be substantial. The current case is on the boarder. There's a lot of code motion that doesn't change the functionality and just moves code around, inflating any scoring efforts. On the other hand, there's been some level of cleanup of the code as well on a very systemic basic through the whole code base. I've not paid extreme attention to every change, to be honest, but on the whole I think it's a close call. Generally, however, the project has been deferential to cases that are close calls where the author has legitimately asserted a claim. That deference, however, has not been extended in several instances where it's not a borderline case. So there's your answer, clear as mud. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfqstc%2BurGqszB%2B=vixJNkc0VJyPVNFV97CwEG7%2BarQhkA>