[ksh93-integration-discuss] Re: Some "fun" with copyright templates... / was: Re: [osol-code] Round two: ((pre-)pre-review) ksh93-integrationwebrev2007-02-02

[Alan Burlison]

Roland Mainz wrote:

> Question is now whether usr/src/lib/libshell/common/data/builtins.c now
> needs a "Sun copyright" or not. My preference would be to avoid adding
> any Sun/CDDL license/copyright/etc. template in this case (1. I don't
> like adding a Sun copyright to David&&Glenn sources unless it's
> completely unavoidable and 2. the change would add a giant section to
> usr/src/lib/libshell/misc/ksh93_solaris_builtin_patch.diff with exactly
> zero techincal value) - the change is quite small (just counting the
> lines) while the major change is done in "solaris_cmdlist.h" (which is
> CDDL-licensed and has a Sun copyright) ; alternatively the "rule" to
> contribute Sun code under the AT&T license could be applied in this case
> (see
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2007-January/002001.html).

If it was me and I had that approval I wouldn't be putting Sun 
copyrights anywhere, and I'd be trying to get the changes accepted 
upstream if at all possible.

In fact, that's exactly what I *did* do for perl ;-)

-- 
Alan Burlison
--