Copyright update tedium
Joseph D. Darcy
joe.darcy at oracle.com
Mon Dec 9 20:39:31 UTC 2024
FWIW, when I've thought about the topic of copyright and licenses
before, I think there are several aspects that can be separated.
One is a syntactic-only check, as the in-flight Skara PR may provide. I
think having a syntactic-only check is Skara is reasonable.
A semantic check is "does file F have the proper license for its role in
the project?" For example, GPL vs GPL w the classpath exception or
"@test /nodynamiccopyright/" for certain langtools tests, etc.
These checks are complicated enough and have enough change over time
that I don't think they are appropriate for Skara. However, they could
be accommodated by check/test that lived in the repository and was
evolved with the repository.
-Joe
On 12/9/2024 11:32 AM, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> OK thanks. Apologies for getting confused, I'm not familiar with the
> skara code so I'm not always sure what I'm looking at.
>
> I personally think Skara shouldn't do that, but it is a topic that
> might be worth discussing for a future Enhancement.
>
>
> I think it's a good idea, but only to the extent that "the right thing
> to do" is well-defined and algorithmically decidable (so the
> likelihood of false positives is virtually zero).
>
> There seems to be some debate about whether copyright updates are
> required for "significant" changes or all changes; only the latter
> case is "well-defined" so this idea would depend on confirmation of an
> "all changes" policy - that is, unless someone can encode
> "significant" into an algorithm.
>
> In other words, it seems like a sufficiently conservative
> implementation (zero false positives) would be a net win.
>
> -Archie
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 1:16 PM Kevin Rushforth
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> No, The Skara PR in question isn't proposing to do this. Rather it
> is checking that _if_ the Copyright header is updated, it is
> syntactically correct.
>
> It would be an item for further discussion to have Skara actually
> get into the business of whether the copyright header should be
> updated and what the copyright year(s) should be. I personally
> think Skara shouldn't do that, but it is a topic that might be
> worth discussing for a future Enhancement.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 12/9/2024 10:37 AM, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Bleh, ignore my comment. I didn't realize the PR#1702 you
>> referenced is already proposing doing this!
>>
>> -Archie
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 10:45 AM Archie Cobbs
>> <archie.cobbs at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for working on this... something of a thankless task :)
>>
>> I'm sure you've considered this but I'll ask anyway. Would it
>> make (more or less) sense to try and enforce the policy on
>> the front-end?
>>
>> By that I mean adding another checkbox requirement to skara's
>> handling of PR's: "🔲 Change must update copyright dates
>> where applicable"
>>
>> The check could start out being conservative:
>>
>> * Only applies to files with certain extensions and/or
>> matching some filter list
>> * Only applies to files containing a recognizable copyright
>> text line
>>
>> -Archie
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 7:06 AM Magnus Ihse Bursie
>> <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> I felt responsibility for the .github files, and wanted
>> to check if there were more build system files needed
>> updating. So I ran a more comprehensive script, and
>> discovered a *lot* more files that needed updating. Like
>> a thousand or so...
>>
>> I have opened a series of issues starting at
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345793 and going up
>> to https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345805 to update
>> these headers.
>>
>> I agree, this should be automated. We're starting to
>> slowly get there, see
>> https://github.com/openjdk/skara/pull/1702 for a first step.
>>
>> /Magnus
>>
>> On 2024-12-03 16:45, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>>> Dumb question...
>>>
>>> It seems like the thing with updating copyright years in
>>> source files could be better automated. At least,
>>> couldn't there be a test that fails if you forget?
>>>
>>> FWIW my little updater script says that these files
>>> still need to be updated to 2024:
>>>
>>> .github/actions/config/action.yml
>>> .github/actions/do-build/action.yml
>>> .github/actions/get-bootjdk/action.yml
>>> .github/actions/get-bundles/action.yml
>>> .github/actions/get-msys2/action.yml
>>> .github/scripts/gen-build-failure-report.sh
>>> .github/scripts/gen-test-summary.sh
>>> .github/workflows/build-cross-compile.yml
>>> .github/workflows/test.yml
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/Attributes.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/InputSource.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/SAXException.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/SAXParseException.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/XMLReader.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/org/xml/sax/helpers/DefaultHandler.java
>>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/platform/Metrics.java
>>> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/vectorization/runner/BasicIntOpTest.java
>>> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/vectorization/runner/BasicLongOpTest.java
>>> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/whitebox/DeoptimizeFramesTest.java
>>>
>>> -Archie
>>>
>>> --
>>> Archie L. Cobbs
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Archie L. Cobbs
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Archie L. Cobbs
>
>
>
> --
> Archie L. Cobbs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/attachments/20241209/87c92887/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list