On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 03:42:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, it'd be nice to have some greater consistency there. My own
> thought about it is that it's rare to have a file that's *completely*
> de novo code, and can be guaranteed to stay that way --- more usually
> there is some amount of copying&pasting, and then you have to wonder
> how much of that material could be traced back to Berkeley. So I
> prefer to err on the side of including their copyright. That line of
> argument basically leads to the conclusion that all the copyright tags
> should be identical, which doesn't seem like an unreasonable rule.
Agreed. Doing that is also a no-brainer when adding new files into
the tree or for your own, separate, modules and that's FWIW the way of
doing things I tend to follow.
--
Michael
