Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Fons Adriaensen <fons@...>
Cc: lad <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Thursday, September 19, 2013 - 9:22 pm

--001a11c2903c28218e04e6c32536
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 06:01:42PM +0200, R. Mattes wrote:

Fons, I've been around the free-software block a time or two and I have to
say I have never *once* encountered the latter form of notation. Adding a
Copyright (c) line with dates is the standard practice, but (obviously?)
only to files that have actually been altered significantly. Anyone
interested (even those weasely lawyers) can run a diff against the two
codebases to see what was actually changed.

> > Well, I would take it as a _marker_

Who cares? Yes, that's the first thing a young, naive developer is going to
do. Fork some big project with grand intentions, go ahead and smear his
filty moniker all over the source, and then.... nothing. Nobody would have
ever even known about this fork if you hadn't brought it up. It would only
become relevant if it actually offered something you don't. And on what
grounds would you prevent that? Because making something better is somehow
perverting it? That's life. No ill will here, Fons, but I hope you don't
think you'll live forever. One day you'll be gone and somebody will get
their filthy mits on your code. That's better than having it die with you,
don't you think?

--001a11c2903c28218e04e6c32536
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Fons Adriaensen =
<fons@linuxaudi=
o.org
> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 06=
:01:42PM +0200, R. Mattes wrote:

> Yes, and why shouldn't it? I read it as a marker to show which

There is world of difference (also legally) between

=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Copyright (c) xxxxxx'

and

=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Additional code/modifications by xxxxx"
Fons, I've=
been around the free-software block a time or two and I have to say I have=
never *once* encountered the latter form of notation. Adding a Copyright (=
c) line with dates is the standard practice, but (obviously?) only to files=
that have actually been altered significantly. Anyone interested (even tho=
se weasely lawyers) can run a diff against the two codebases to see what wa=
s actually changed.
=C2=A0

Like a dog pissing on a lamppost, or some juvenile spraying
his tags on someone else's property ?Who cares? Yes, that's the first thing a young, naive developer is g=
oing to do. Fork some big project with grand intentions, go ahead and smear=
his filty moniker all over the source, and then.... nothing. Nobody would =
have ever even known about this fork if you hadn't brought it up. It wo=
uld only become relevant if it actually offered something you don't. An=
d on what grounds would you prevent that? Because making something better i=
s somehow perverting it? That's life. No ill will here, Fons, but I hop=
e you don't think you'll live forever. One day you'll be gone a=
nd somebody will get their filthy mits on your code. That's better than=
having it die with you, don't you think?

--001a11c2903c28218e04e6c32536--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, geoff, (Wed Sep 18, 9:56 pm)
[LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), IOhannes m zmoelnig, (Thu Sep 19, 3:35 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Arnold Krille, (Thu Sep 19, 11:13 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Paul Davis, (Thu Sep 19, 11:39 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), IOhannes m zmölnig, (Fri Sep 20, 10:24 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Dan Muresan, (Fri Sep 20, 12:25 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Harry van Haaren, (Fri Sep 20, 12:38 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Harry van Haaren, (Fri Sep 20, 12:39 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), R. Mattes, (Thu Sep 19, 4:01 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Sep 19, 9:05 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Fri Sep 20, 7:52 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 7:57 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Fri Sep 20, 8:05 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 8:24 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), J. Liles, (Fri Sep 20, 8:50 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Sat Sep 21, 5:52 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), John Rigg, (Sat Sep 21, 9:30 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Sat Sep 21, 9:52 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), John Rigg, (Sat Sep 21, 10:13 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), hermann meyer, (Sat Sep 21, 10:02 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 9:28 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Sat Sep 21, 6:00 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), hermann meyer, (Sat Sep 21, 6:10 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Sat Sep 21, 6:43 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), hermann meyer, (Sat Sep 21, 6:59 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Sat Sep 21, 7:20 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Sat Sep 21, 6:40 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), hermann meyer, (Sat Sep 21, 6:56 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Fri Sep 20, 10:23 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Sat Sep 21, 5:40 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Dan Muresan, (Sat Sep 21, 6:47 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), J. Liles, (Fri Sep 20, 10:00 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 10:06 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Dan Muresan, (Sat Sep 21, 11:42 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Felix Homann, (Fri Sep 20, 8:32 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Gordon JC Pearce, (Fri Sep 20, 9:36 am)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), J. Liles, (Fri Sep 20, 4:04 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 4:18 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), J. Liles, (Fri Sep 20, 4:30 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 7:35 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Ralf Mardorf, (Fri Sep 20, 4:42 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), J. Liles, (Thu Sep 19, 9:22 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fred Gleason, (Thu Sep 19, 9:46 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Nils Gey, (Thu Sep 19, 3:49 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Sep 19, 3:45 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), IOhannes m zmoelnig, (Thu Sep 19, 3:57 pm)
Re: [LAD] forking (was Re: Aeolus), IOhannes m zmölnig, (Thu Sep 19, 8:56 pm)