[ipxe-devel] Source file license header clarification

Daniel P. Berrange berrange at redhat.com
Fri Mar 23 14:15:19 GMT 2012

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 02:13:36PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In the course of the Fedora review for iPXE, it was identified that many
> iPXE source files do not have any license header comment in them. While
> the intent is commonly that any such ommisions imply that the file(s) are
> covered by the terms of the top level COPYING file, the Fedora review
> guides say we should make a recommendation to upstream communities that
> they ensure per-file license headers.
> So this message is just such a friendly hint. To make life easier, I
> wrote a simple perl script to try & identify .h or .c files which have
> got either incomplete or missing license information. By incomplete I
> mean that a file has iPXE's magic FILE_LICENCE macro, but no comment
> header. By missing, I mean it lacks FILE_LICENCE and / or comments.
> IMHO, since iPXE seems to contain a non-trivial number of files that
> have been copied from other compatible open source projects, it is
> wise to ensure every source file has unambiguous license comments.
> I'm attaching the script, which on a GIT checkout it reports the
> following:

And this time with the script actually attached :-)

|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: license.pl
Type: application/x-perl
Size: 2288 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ipxe.org/pipermail/ipxe-devel/attachments/20120323/60a06528/attachment.bin>

More information about the ipxe-devel mailing list