I think that a reasonable first-time contributor could be confused by
Apache's rules for including copyright notices
(http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new). Apache advises us to
include a short copyright notice in "each source file (code and
documentation) but excluding the LICENSE and NOTICE files)". The
definition of source and documentation is a little vague although it
seems to include LICENSE and NOTICE files which are immediately and
happily excluded.
So what constitutes source and documentation? A reasonable person might
suppose these terms to include every file under various subversion roots
including https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/code/trunk and
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/trunk. But a quick glance
at our source tree indicates that this is not what we intend. We don't
seem to include copyright notices in:
o Localized message files. These really look like a kind of source code
to me.
o Other properties files used to control configurations and tests.
o Ant build scripts.
o Documentation on how to build and test Derby.
Where do we state our rules about which files require copyright notices?
Is this the implicit rule:
o Only files with the extension "java" require copyright notices.
Or should a first-time contributor apply some other implicit rules:
o When creating a new subversion controlled file, first look for an
existing file with the same extension. If the existing file you picked
has a copyright notice, then include a copyright notice in your new file.
o If your new file has a completely novel extension and there's no
corresponding file under source control, then do what seems reasonable
to you.
