On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 6:36 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> I noticed that some of the source files does not include the copyright
> information. Most of the files have included it, but few files have
> not included it. I felt it should be included. The attached patch
> contains the fix for including the copyright information in the source
> files. Let me know your thoughts on the same.
I'd like to get rid of those IDENTIFICATION lines completely (they are
left over from the time when the project used CVS, and that section
had a $Header$ "ident" tag, but in the git era, those ident tags are
no longer in fashion).
There are other inconsistencies in the copyright messages, like
whether we say "Portions" or not for PGDU, and whether we use 1996- or
the year the file was created, and whether the Berkeley copyright is
there or not (different people seem to have different ideas about
whether that's needed for a post-Berkeley file).
