Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
On 2013-12-02 11:37, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Sean Dague wrote: I'm totally in favor of going further and saying empty files shouldn't have license headers, because their content of emptiness isn't copyrightable [1]. That's just not how it's written today. I went ahead and sent a first patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59090/ Help appreciated. :) The patch is ready for review, but it also a bit stricter as it completely disallows files with _only_ comments in them. This is something that sounds like a good idea, but Joe wanted to bring this to the mailing list for attention first, in case there would be a problem. For reference, I believe the primary concern was that this would require the removal of a few author comments in empty files, such as this: https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/network/security_group/__init__.py#L18 I don't see a problem with that (the files with actual code also have the author comment, so it will still be clear who wrote it, and of course Git knows all of this too), but I agree that this is not something we want to do without giving people the opportunity to discuss it. -Ben ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Sean Dague wrote: I'm totally in favor of going further and saying empty files shouldn't have license headers, because their content of emptiness isn't copyrightable [1]. That's just not how it's written today. I went ahead and sent a first patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59090/ Help appreciated. :) The patch is ready for review, but it also a bit stricter as it completely disallows files with _only_ comments in them. This is something that sounds like a good idea, but Joe wanted to bring this to the mailing list for attention first, in case there would be a problem. -- Julien Danjou # Free Software hacker # independent consultant # http://julien.danjou.info signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
Hi folks, according to our hacking rules all source files should contain the Apache license header in the beginning (http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/#openstack-licensing). There are special files that in most of the cases are empty, i.e., __init__.py. I used to put license headers to __init__ files when I was working on Neutron or Ironic. However, recently I got a feedback for one of my patches from several folks that said that licence headers should be removed from __init__ files because empty files are not source files. The point of this email is _not_ to blame someone or to push my personal opinion to the folks who gave me the feedback. What I'm trying to do is to to bring more clarity to our hacking rules because, as I see, currently different folks interpret them differently. - Roman signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Roman Prykhodchenko wrote: The point of this email is _not_ to blame someone or to push my personal opinion to the folks who gave me the feedback. What I'm trying to do is to to bring more clarity to our hacking rules because, as I see, currently different folks interpret them differently. Anyway, having headers in empty file sounds just dumb. Maybe a mistake that has been transformed into a rule? -- Julien Danjou // Free Software hacker / independent consultant // http://julien.danjou.info signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
On 11/28/2013 01:01 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Roman Prykhodchenko wrote: The point of this email is _not_ to blame someone or to push my personal opinion to the folks who gave me the feedback. What I'm trying to do is to to bring more clarity to our hacking rules because, as I see, currently different folks interpret them differently. Anyway, having headers in empty file sounds just dumb. Maybe a mistake that has been transformed into a rule? When we wrote the hacking rule for the license check basically we didn't want to overreach and cause a ton of work on projects to purge this. So basically any file 10 lines, we don't enforce the Apache license header check. This allows __init__.py files to be either empty (which is what they should be), or have the header. It just doesn't check for trivially small files. I'm totally in favor of going further and saying empty files shouldn't have license headers, because their content of emptiness isn't copyrightable [1]. That's just not how it's written today. -Sean 1. Philip Glass might disagree - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3 -- Sean Dague http://dague.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
Sean, Julien, Than really makes sense. I've seen cases when guys -1ed patches for not having the header in empty files referring to that ...all source files... phrase. That's why I think it's reasonable to add your comments to the Hacking rules. - Roman On Nov 28, 2013, at 20:08 , Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 11/28/2013 01:01 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Roman Prykhodchenko wrote: The point of this email is _not_ to blame someone or to push my personal opinion to the folks who gave me the feedback. What I'm trying to do is to to bring more clarity to our hacking rules because, as I see, currently different folks interpret them differently. Anyway, having headers in empty file sounds just dumb. Maybe a mistake that has been transformed into a rule? When we wrote the hacking rule for the license check basically we didn't want to overreach and cause a ton of work on projects to purge this. So basically any file 10 lines, we don't enforce the Apache license header check. This allows __init__.py files to be either empty (which is what they should be), or have the header. It just doesn't check for trivially small files. I'm totally in favor of going further and saying empty files shouldn't have license headers, because their content of emptiness isn't copyrightable [1]. That's just not how it's written today. -Sean 1. Philip Glass might disagree - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3 -- Sean Dague http://dague.net signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Hacking] License headers in empty files
On Thu, Nov 28 2013, Sean Dague wrote: I'm totally in favor of going further and saying empty files shouldn't have license headers, because their content of emptiness isn't copyrightable [1]. That's just not how it's written today. I went ahead and sent a first patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59090/ Help appreciated. :) -- Julien Danjou -- Free Software hacker - independent consultant -- http://julien.danjou.info signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
