elementary-dev-community team mailing list archive

[Christian Dywan <christian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 14.06.2012 15:09, Jaap Broekhuizen a écrit :
> Christian said:
>
>     For what it's worth, the name is meaningless to actual copyright
>     disputes. I tend to like if I can see at a glance who's the person to
>     talk to for a certain file.
>
>
> If that is true, then i'd vote for just elementary, if this is not
> true then of course we'd have to add the name of the developer who
> created the file (and the name of developers who made huge changes).
> Are the names in the copyright actually used by people to find out who
> made the file? Most of the time it's just the name of the maintainer
> of a specific project, and when someone is working on a project they
> will probably know who that maintainer actually is. Now for something
> like granite, where a lot of files are written by a lot of different
> people, there it would come in handy, but i don't know how much of a
> necessity it would be in the other projects. At least i cant think of
> projects that we have other than granite where multiple devs do really
> big changes to files.

Let me briefly expand my point. I, and others, look at the name to see
who's most likely the author(s). It is also useful to have an idea of
the copyright holder(s).
However, often enough the names are incomplete or there's only a company
name¹. So for legal purposes, you would eventually resort to version
history, issue trackers and elsewhere to accurately determine who's done
what.

¹Even if there's a company name, there's a difference between usage
rights and individual copyright.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature