Re: Patch for Copyright Notices in maintain.texi [WAS: Re: Approving Dezyne, savannah task 16067]

[Janneke Nieuwenhuizen]

Alfred M. Szmidt writes:

>    >        notice in each nontrivial file in the package.  As a rule of 
> thumb,
>    >        any interesting file more than ten lines long should be 
> considered and
>    >        could be nontrivial for this purpose.  This includes header files
>
>    It seems to me, if a file isn't interesting, it just doesn't belong
>    in the package; if a rule (of thumb) is referred to, it may make sense
>    to explain it.
>
> Maybe the wording here, "interesting", is what is the issue.  I think
> what Janneke was trying to convey (correct me if I am wrong), was a
> "interesting" file in the sense that it is copyrightable, and not
> e.g., autogenerated, just some boiler plate, simple test cases, etc.

Yes, I believe we need a better rule of thumb than the 10-lines
suggestion.  If any line is counted as any other, these seven lines

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

would not be copyrightable, and not need a header, while these would

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I find the former, much more "interesting" than the latter, don't you
agree?  In any case, to *such* a file I certainly *would* (want to
suggest to) add a header.  Yet a file can be non-interesting by itself,
and simultaneously essential for the package.

While files like the second could be crucial for a test framework or
something, I believe it would be unnecessary, silly, and
counterproductive having to add a header, let alone writing code to
stript that header during test (as an example).

A file that is not essential, e.g., seldomly used debug code, could be
very creative, need a header, yet be not essential (and be a better
candidate not to include in the package).

Maybe something like "sufficiently creative", or "considerably
creative", or "somewhat creative", or "non-trivial" could better than
"interesting"?

Greetings,
Janneke

-- 
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org>  | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com