Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] maint: enforce recent copyright style
Eric Blake wrote:
* cfg.mk (sc_copyright_format): New rule.
Suggested by Jim Meyering.
---
I tested that 'make syntax-check' with this patch rebased in
place prior to the copyright updates catches the problems, but
that when applied to the top of the tree it passes.
cfg.mk | 9 +++++++++
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cfg.mk b/cfg.mk
index 9fc2d66..e60820d 100644
--- a/cfg.mk
+++ b/cfg.mk
@@ -269,6 +269,15 @@ sc_preprocessor_indentation:
echo '$(ME): skipping test $@: cppi not installed' 1>&2; \
fi
+sc_copyright_format:
+ @$(VC_LIST_EXCEPT) | xargs grep -ni 'copyright .*Red 'Hat \
+ | grep -v Inc \
+ && { echo '$(ME): use correct Red Hat copyright' 1>&2; \
+ exit 1; } || :
+ @$(VC_LIST_EXCEPT) | xargs grep -ni 'copyright [^(].*Red 'Hat \
+ && { echo '$(ME): use correct Red Hat copyright' 1>&2; \
+ exit 1; } || :
+
# We don't use this feature of maint.mk.
prev_version_file = /dev/null
Thanks!
In each diagnostic, it'd be nice to say what's missing.
"Inc." in the first, "(C)" in the second.
In the second, isn't s/correct/consistent/ more appropriate?
Or is there some legal guidance saying that the (C) is required?
I seem to recall reading that at least with FSF copyrights,
the "(C)" is optional, and without legal value.
The only problem I can see is that when/if adding copyright
year numbers (non-range notation), eventually, some copyright
lines will be split, causing this check to report false-positive
matches. This is another argument for using YYYY-ZZZZ year ranges,
when possible, rather than writing them out as Y1, Y2, Y3, ... YN.