Copyright dates

[Mark Atwood]

Commercial FOSS audit tools like Protecode and Blackduck will be able to
recognize the SPDX tags, and the Copyright text.


In our file ntpsec/devel/hacking.txt :

We use the SPDX convention for inclusion by reference.  You can read about
this at

      http://spdx.org/licenses

When you create a new file, mark it as follows (updating the year) as
required:

------------------------------------------------

/* Copyright 2017 by the NTPsec project contributors

 * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause

 */

------------------------------------------------


For documentation:


------------------------------------------------

// Copyright 2017 by the NTPsec project contributors

// SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0

------------------------------------------------


Modify as needed for whatever comment syntax the language or markup uses. Good
places for these markings are at the end of an extended

header comment, or at the very top of the file.


When you modify a file, leave existing copyright markings in place - especially
all references to Dr. Dave Mills, to Mr. Harlan Stenn, and

to the Network Time Foundation.


You *may* add a project copyright and replace the inline license with an
SPDX tag. For example:


------------------------------------------------

/* Copyright 2017 by the NTPsec project contributors

 * SPDX-License-Identifier: NTP

 */

------------------------------------------------



On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:44 AM Daniel Poirot <dtpoirot at gmail.com> wrote:

> Commercial FOSS audit tools like Protecode and BlackDuck will match a
> snippet and attribute to the FOSS project.
>
>
> On Jan 30, 2017, at 12:30 PM, Mark Atwood <fallenpegasus at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's... complicated.
>
> We don't need to have a notice attached to every file, because there is a
> copyright notice attached to the project as a whole, and there is a notice
> attached to each repo.  Individual files generally don't each need their
> own notice, since individual files generally no longer get "detached" from
> a project or tree.
>
> But, if you were to copy in a substantial amount of text from another
> source, you should make sure that the copyright from that source is
> properly declared, right next to the text pulled in.
>
> Also, however, documentation is a bit unusual in that it is much more
> likely to be detached and separately distributed from the rest of the
> project.  We should make sure that if the documentation is ever printed
> out, or is separately displayed on sites like man7.org, that a copyright
> notice should be readable.
>
> ..m
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:55 AM Hal Murray <hmurray at megapathdsl.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> fallenpegasus at gmail.com said:
> > Right now our standard copyright text is "Copyright
> $YEAR_YOU_ARE_WRITING_THI
> > S by the NTP Project contributors"
>
> Should the documentation files have a copyright notice?
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at ntpsec.org
> http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20170130/5d1115ab/attachment.html>