Re: [jamboost] A few nits

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-04 10:41:39

At 05:08 AM 2/4/2003, Vladimir Prus wrote:

>I've fixed two of them and fill fix the last one later. But have no
>idea how to make the file linked.

Create a link to it in some HTML file. If it is a file that isn't being 
linked to because it isn't part of an official release yet, try adding a 
link to it from itself to suppress the error message.

>
>> tools/build/examples-v2/hello/hello.cpp: missing copyright
>
>Egh... is that really required to have a copyright in this file? That's
>"hello world" application!

The inspect program just scans for "copyright" or "Copyright", so you can 
suppress errors by adding a comment like: // Not copyright

> > tools/build/examples-v2/make/Jamfile: tabs in file
>
>Fixed this, and other tabs occurences.
>
>> tools/build/test/dependency-test/a.cpp: missing copyright
>
>Even on tests?
>
>> tools/build/test/dependency-test/a.h: missing copyright
>
>Even on empty files :-)

It is very reassuring to lawyers to see copyright messages. It also helps 
us focus on files of questionable ownership if all non-problem files, even 
tests, have some kind of copyright message.

>... But, files in examples-v2/qt and example-v2/qt-ui should
>not be altered. Have no idea about their copyrights.

For files like that, we need to figure out who the copyright owner is, and 
get permission to use them.

I guess there are cases (helloworld.cpp might be an example) where a file 
carries no copyright, but we feel that's OK. A comment should be added 
saying so, and why. Perhaps:

// Not copyright because this program is in the public domain

Some files can't (at least in the US) be copyrighted. "Mere lists and 
compilations" are not copyrightable, IIRC. So a list of C++ header files 
used as some sort of test file wouldn't be copyrightable if that is 
correct.

So the comment might read:

// Not copyright because this is just a list of standard headers

--Beman