On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 5:39 PM Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > Looking at the stats, it's clear that it took a lot of code from other > files, so it seems disingenuous to claim that it doesn't have even a > single line that isn't copyrighted by UCB regents.
I took that claim at face value. Perhaps it was just an oversight. But if it really wasn't, then it's not just "portions" of the copyright that go to the PGDG. > I think the easiest is to state that all files, even new files are > Portions (c) each of these entities, period. Trying to distinguish code > that's not even a single line derived from UCB Regents seems really > labor-intensive. That seems like a reasonable policy to me, outside of third-party code that gets vendored into the tree. I am also in favor of being conservative about this. -- Peter Geoghegan
