[dpdk-dev,RFC,35/35] mempool: update copyright

  Update the copyright of files touched by this patch series.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 1 +
 lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 1 +
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
  

I understand that 6Wind has made major contributions to DPDK in many places.

I would prefer that each file not get copyright additions from each
contributor,
otherwise this starts a bad precedent where the source gets cluttered with
every contributor.


On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:

> Update the copyright of files touched by this patch series.
>
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 1 +
>  lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 1 +
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
> b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
> index 209449a..3851edd 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>   *   BSD LICENSE
>   *
>   *   Copyright(c) 2010-2014 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + *   Copyright(c) 2016 6WIND S.A.
>   *   All rights reserved.
>   *
>   *   Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> index 7599790..56220a4 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>   *   BSD LICENSE
>   *
>   *   Copyright(c) 2010-2014 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + *   Copyright(c) 2016 6WIND S.A.
>   *   All rights reserved.
>   *
>   *   Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> --
> 2.1.4
>
>
  

On 03/09/2016 08:52 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> I understand that 6Wind has made major contributions to DPDK in many places.
>
> I would prefer that each file not get copyright additions from each
> contributor,
> otherwise this starts a bad precedent where the source gets cluttered with
> every contributor.

That, and they also add rather useless noise to patches and commit 
history just because people feel compelled to update the copyright years.

Many projects have a separate credits file where contributors get noted, 
but I guess those tend to be under copyleft licenses, the BSD license 
expects somebody to claim copyright.

Anyway, I'd much rather see one toplevel license where all such updates 
go. It'd make life easier for packagers whose distros require including 
a license file in packages, and it'd also help fix the first impression 
of dpdk being under [L]GPL (which easily happens if you just glimpse at 
the toplevel source directory)

This is of course getting a bit side-tracked for this patch...

	- Panu -