Return-Path: Received: from mail-vn0-f51.google.com ([209.85.216.51]:46766 "EHLO mail-vn0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752584AbbFHVDY (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:03:24 -0400 Received: by vnbf7 with SMTP id f7so19603124vnb.13 for ; Mon, 08 Jun 2015 14:03:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150608204734.GA27887@fieldses.org> References: <1433453213-13466-1-git-send-email-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <1433453213-13466-2-git-send-email-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <1433453213-13466-3-git-send-email-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <20150608204734.GA27887@fieldses.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:03:22 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] SUNRPC: Clean up bc_send() From: Trond Myklebust To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Chuck Lever , "William A. (Andy) Adamson" , Linux NFS Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 4:47 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > I don't know, the above looks like pretty generic boilerplate, and I'd > rather not accumulate a that kind of thing every time we move a > significant piece of code around. Could we compromise by adding a line > or two to net/sunrpc/svc.c following the existing convention there? > ("backchannel implementation originally (c) 2007 Network Appliance and > (c) 2009 Netapp", or similar?) Not a lawyer either, just looking for a > way to keep it both honest and concise.... > For significant contributions, we do sometimes allow contributors to add a copyright notice. The other case where it is usually done is when creating a new file, on the theory that the GPL does require that code be copyrighted in order to be enforceable. I'd suggest just a simple: "Portions of this code are (c) 2007 Network Appliance, (c) 2009 NetApp". Trond