man/man2/kill.2: Add Amit Pinhas as a contributer

man/man2/kill.2 +0 -0

 .\"
 .TH kill 2 (date) "Linux man-pages (unreleased)"
 .SH NAME

Signature · 1 line

2.43.0

Quoted 3 lines

.\" Modified 2004-06-24 by aeb
.\" Modified, 2004-11-30, after idea from [email protected]
+.\" Modified 2025-02-12, after correction from <[email protected]>

We don't update those anymore. We now rely on the metadata in git(1).

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

Hi Alex,

At 2025-02-12T21:26:20+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
[...]

Quoted 12 lines

Quoted 3 lines

.\" Modified 2004-06-24 by aeb
.\" Modified, 2004-11-30, after idea from [email protected]
+.\" Modified 2025-02-12, after correction from <[email protected]>

We don't update those anymore. We now rely on the metadata in git(1).

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

That way (1) anyone diffing old and new versions don't see what looks like an unmotivated erasure of contributor credits; (2) people who have contributed and been credited don't feel as much of a sting, since they know records continue to be kept in a publicly available (and replicated, distributed place) and (3) future contributors know that they can expect to be treated equitably with past ones.

Quoted 14 lines · G. Branden Robinson

At 2025-02-12T21:26:20+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
[...]

Quoted 12 lines

Quoted 3 lines

.\" Modified 2004-06-24 by aeb
.\" Modified, 2004-11-30, after idea from [email protected]
+.\" Modified 2025-02-12, after correction from <[email protected]>

We don't update those anymore. We now rely on the metadata in git(1).

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

Okay, time has come to open this melon. :)

Quoted 5 lines

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 6 lines

That way (1) anyone diffing old and new versions don't see what looks like an unmotivated erasure of contributor credits; (2) people who have contributed and been credited don't feel as much of a sting, since they know records continue to be kept in a publicly available (and replicated, distributed place) and (3) future contributors know that they can expect to be treated equitably with past ones.

How about something like this?

	diff --git i/man/man2/mount.2 w/man/man2/mount.2
	index 178d59b52..f65c3947f 100644
	--- i/man/man2/mount.2
	+++ w/man/man2/mount.2
	@@ -4,18 +4,8 @@
	 .\"
	 .\" SPDX-License-Identifier: Linux-man-pages-copyleft
	 .\"
	-.\" Modified 1996-11-04 by Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]>
	-.\" Modified 2001-10-13 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]>
	-.\"    Added note on historical behavior of MS_NOSUID
	-.\" Modified 2002-05-16 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]>
	-.\"    Extensive changes and additions
	-.\" Modified 2002-05-27 by aeb
	-.\" Modified 2002-06-11 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]>
	-.\"    Enhanced descriptions of MS_MOVE, MS_BIND, and MS_REMOUNT
	-.\" Modified 2004-06-17 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]>
	-.\" 2005-05-18, mtk, Added MNT_EXPIRE, plus a few other tidy-ups.
	-.\" 2008-10-06, mtk: move umount*() material into separate umount.2 page.
	-.\" 2008-10-06, mtk: Add discussion of namespaces.
	+.\" See git(1) commit man-pages-6.11^ (2025-02-13, "Remove in-source contribution records")
	+.\" for old records of changes to this file.
	 .\"
	 .TH mount 2 (date) "Linux man-pages (unreleased)"
	 .SH NAME

I would of course make sure to commit this right before the release, to make sure I don't invalidate the reference.

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 26 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 26 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email).  The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform?  That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I was not sure if I should reply to all (including the mailing list). Please clarify for others.

This change is OK as far as I am concerned. I'm always happy to help lessen the maintenance burden. Eliminating redundant, copyright information appears to be a good way to it.

The git history holds detailed information about the line-by-line modifications to each file anyway.

Quoted 8 lines · Mathieu Desnoyers

Quoted 7 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email).  The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform?  That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I was not sure if I should reply to all (including the mailing list). Please clarify for others.

Quoted 5 lines

This change is OK as far as I am concerned. I'm always happy to help lessen the maintenance burden. Eliminating redundant, copyright information appears to be a good way to it.

Quoted 2 lines

The git history holds detailed information about the line-by-line modifications to each file anyway.

100% agree with Mathieu here.

This is OK for me and something we already did in glibc to lessen the maintenance burden.

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Hi,

Quoted 7 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Quoted 4 lines

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Should the one-line replacement statement in each file refer back to the CREDITS file?

Also, nothing seems to say that anyone listed in CREDITS actually contributed copyrightable material to the project (as opposed to, say, review effort, moral support or free pizza).

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

Either way, ack for the changes affecting me.

[...]

Cheers
---Dave

Hi Dave,

Quoted 16 lines · Dave Martin

Hi,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Quoted 2 lines

Should the one-line replacement statement in each file refer back to the CREDITS file?

I prefer not, because then someone can copy the files to a different repository, without needing to modify the notices (they might take the CREDITS file as CREDITS_Linux-man-pages).

Quoted 3 lines

Also, nothing seems to say that anyone listed in CREDITS actually contributed copyrightable material to the project (as opposed to, say, review effort, moral support or free pizza).

I initially planned to include reviewers, etc. into CREDITS. While doing that, I realized that wasn't easy, because the file would be huge, and would need to be updated too frequently; plus git(1) does a better job of documenting that with the Reviewed-by, Cc, and other tags.

Quoted 2 lines

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

Yes, now that I discarded the idea of crediting *all* contributors, I agree this file should be renamed to AUTHORS. Regarding a file solely to clarify that the AUTHORS file holds the copyright holders of the project, I guess by calling it AUTHORS it would already be obvious. I'm hesitant to add another file for explaining that because the more uppercase files there are in the root of the repo, the harder it is to understand their relationship. However, I can add something in the README, where I already document what each file is.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Should the one-line replacement statement in each file refer back to the CREDITS file?

I prefer not, because then someone can copy the files to a different repository, without needing to modify the notices (they might take the CREDITS file as CREDITS_Linux-man-pages).

Fair enough, though would it make sense for the boilerplate line to at least become

# Copyright, The authors of the Linux man-pages project

...?

This remains meaningful out of context, but when shipped with the original tree this wording macthes up with the naming of the AUTHORS file (assuming that's what the file is called).

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

Yes, now that I discarded the idea of crediting *all* contributors, I agree this file should be renamed to AUTHORS. Regarding a file solely to clarify that the AUTHORS file holds the copyright holders of the project, I guess by calling it AUTHORS it would already be obvious. I'm hesitant to add another file for explaining that because the more uppercase files there are in the root of the repo, the harder it is to understand their relationship. However, I can add something in the README, where I already document what each file is.

Ack, it's probably fairly obvious what a file called "AUTHORS" means.

Just a suggestion, would something like this work in README:

This will still be a true description regardless of whether the list is complete or if non page content contributors are included. (There are probably plenty of borderline cases as to whether something counts as a page content contribution or not.)

Cheers
---Dave

Hi Dave,

Quoted 10 lines · Dave Martin

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Should the one-line replacement statement in each file refer back to the CREDITS file?

I prefer not, because then someone can copy the files to a different repository, without needing to modify the notices (they might take the CREDITS file as CREDITS_Linux-man-pages).

Fair enough, though would it make sense for the boilerplate line to at least become

Quoted 7 lines

# Copyright, The authors of the Linux man-pages project

...?

This remains meaningful out of context, but when shipped with the original tree this wording macthes up with the naming of the AUTHORS file (assuming that's what the file is called).

Hmmmm. I see the point. That sounds very reasonable. Contributors sounded more like inclusive of anyone who passes by and writes a few lines, as opposed to authors which are usually considered only the long- term ones. But since we would list all of them as AUTHORS, they're clearly included. So, I'm going to do that change.

Quoted 16 lines

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

Yes, now that I discarded the idea of crediting *all* contributors, I agree this file should be renamed to AUTHORS. Regarding a file solely to clarify that the AUTHORS file holds the copyright holders of the project, I guess by calling it AUTHORS it would already be obvious. I'm hesitant to add another file for explaining that because the more uppercase files there are in the root of the repo, the harder it is to understand their relationship. However, I can add something in the README, where I already document what each file is.

Ack, it's probably fairly obvious what a file called "AUTHORS" means.

Just a suggestion, would something like this work in README:

Review

Quoted 4 lines

(quoted diff) +4 -0

+   AUTHORS
+       List of individuals and organizations that have contributed
+       content to the project.
+

Certainly. Thanks!

Quoted 4 lines

This will still be a true description regardless of whether the list is complete or if non page content contributors are included. (There are probably plenty of borderline cases as to whether something counts as a page content contribution or not.)

Yep. For now, I haven't documented it, but I've drawn the line at:

	-  Had its name either in a copyright notice,
	-  or in a source line saying something like "modified by"
	-  or was 'Author' in a git commit.

Anyone who meets at least one of those has been included in CREDITS (to be renamed to AUTHORS).

Exceptions are authors of code that was taken by this project, but who didn't contribute to this project themselves. For example, the regents of the University of California wrote pages that have been incorporated into this project, but they didn't consciously contribute to this project. Thus, I've retained their copyright notices, and didn't add them to CREDITS.

Cheers,
Alex

Quoted 4 lines

Cheers
---Dave

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi Dave,

Quoted 3 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Dave,

On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 04:43:36PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:

Quoted 23 lines

Review

Quoted 6 lines

Just a suggestion, would something like this work in README:

(quoted diff) +4 -0

+   AUTHORS
+       List of individuals and organizations that have contributed
+       content to the project.
+

Certainly. Thanks!

Quoted 4 lines

This will still be a true description regardless of whether the list is complete or if non page content contributors are included. (There are probably plenty of borderline cases as to whether something counts as a page content contribution or not.)

Yep. For now, I haven't documented it, but I've drawn the line at:

	-  Had its name either in a copyright notice,
	-  or in a source line saying something like "modified by"
	-  or was 'Author' in a git commit.

Anyone who meets at least one of those has been included in CREDITS (to be renamed to AUTHORS).

Quoted 6 lines

Exceptions are authors of code that was taken by this project, but who didn't contribute to this project themselves. For example, the regents of the University of California wrote pages that have been incorporated into this project, but they didn't consciously contribute to this project. Thus, I've retained their copyright notices, and didn't add them to CREDITS.

I've applied both changes already (currently in my branch):

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/src/alx/linux/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?h=contrib&id=98c87fcf783f20da7aae8adbe21e1954d9e8f310>
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/src/alx/linux/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?h=contrib&id=d5218b220e41a1ed031eea6219237fda0a93d9b2>

Should the one-line replacement statement in each file refer back to the CREDITS file?

Also, nothing seems to say that anyone listed in CREDITS actually contributed copyrightable material to the project (as opposed to, say, review effort, moral support or free pizza).

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

I prefer not, because then someone can copy the files to a different repository, without needing to modify the notices (they might take the CREDITS file as CREDITS_Linux-man-pages).

Quoted 3 lines

Also, nothing seems to say that anyone listed in CREDITS actually contributed copyrightable material to the project (as opposed to, say, review effort, moral support or free pizza).

I initially planned to include reviewers, etc. into CREDITS. While doing that, I realized that wasn't easy, because the file would be huge, and would need to be updated too frequently; plus git(1) does a better job of documenting that with the Reviewed-by, Cc, and other tags.

Quoted 3 lines

Renaming the CREDITS file to AUTHORS and/or clarifying this in a brief top-level LICENSE / COPYING file might make the meaning clearer?

Yes, now that I discarded the idea of crediting *all* contributors, I agree this file should be renamed to AUTHORS. Regarding a file solely to clarify that the AUTHORS file holds the copyright holders of the project, I guess by calling it AUTHORS it would already be obvious. I'm hesitant to add another file for explaining that because the more uppercase files there are in the root of the repo, the harder it is to understand their relationship. However, I can add something in the README, where I already document what each file is.

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 26 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

(thanks for clarifying about posting on-list.)

Yes, I approve. (Though I have changed to using [email protected] as my primary e-mail address, it would be handy if you could make that correction during this process as well, but not required.)

Cheers,

Tycho

Quoted 1 line · Tycho Andersen

Hi Alex,

Hi Tycho,

Quoted 14 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 11 lines

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Quoted 5 lines

(thanks for clarifying about posting on-list.)

Yes, I approve. (Though I have changed to using [email protected] as my primary e-mail address, it would be handy if you could make that correction during this process as well, but not required.)

Thanks! (I had already added you to CREDITS with that address, unless I'm mistaken. Can you please check if all's good?)

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Yes, I approve. (Though I have changed to using [email protected] as my primary e-mail address, it would be handy if you could make that correction during this process as well, but not required.)

Thanks! (I had already added you to CREDITS with that address, unless I'm mistaken. Can you please check if all's good?)

Here I see:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/diff/CREDITS?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657

[email protected]; but it's also fine if you want to keep the commit id the same.

Hi Tycho,

Quoted 7 lines · Tycho Andersen

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Yes, I approve. (Though I have changed to using [email protected] as my primary e-mail address, it would be handy if you could make that correction during this process as well, but not required.)

Thanks! (I had already added you to CREDITS with that address, unless I'm mistaken. Can you please check if all's good?)

Quoted 6 lines

Here I see:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/diff/CREDITS?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657

[email protected]; but it's also fine if you want to keep the commit id the same.

Ahh, I see. There are three commits that touch that file: The first one took the names from "modified by" and similar lines in source code. (You don't appear in that one.) The second one took the names from copyright notices. I picked @tycho.ws in that one. Then, the third one took names from commit Author. In that one, I updated your main to the @tycho.pizza one.

	$ git log -p man-pages-6.14 -- AUTHORS CREDITS \
	| grep \
		-e ^commit \
		-e ^Date: \
		-e '^    \(CREDITS\|AUTHORS\|\*\|man/\)' \
		-e tycho \
		-e ^--- -e ^+++
	commit 0cf255ac79231999d79cd656f81013089d2d4153
	Date:   Fri Apr 11 16:15:50 2025 +0200
	    CREDITS: Add commit authors
	--- a/CREDITS
	+++ b/CREDITS
	-Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
	+Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
	commit 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657
	Date:   Fri Apr 11 02:19:48 2025 +0200
	    *, CREDITS: Unify copyright notices

	--- a/CREDITS
	+++ b/CREDITS
	+Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
	commit 52b7bab3a44fb5d2d464fa8acd6beee3b62269aa
	Date:   Fri Mar 14 14:02:41 2025 +0100
	    man/, CREDITS: Move in-source contribution records to CREDITS
	--- /dev/null
	+++ b/CREDITS

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 17 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Quoted 9 lines

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

--
Cheers,
Carlos.

--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

There is a pending patch to standardize all my email addresses in the kernel. This patch may conflict with the one in Andrew's tree.

The Email address going forward should be

Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

Quoted 123 lines

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 17 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Quoted 9 lines

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

--
Cheers,
Carlos.

--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Also regarding Andrew Morton's email address: I dont think osdl.org is still valid. He uses linuxfoundation.org these days.
But you better ask him yourself.

Quoted 4 lines · Christoph Lameter (Ampere)

Also regarding Andrew Morton's email address: I dont think osdl.org is still valid. He uses linuxfoundation.org these days.
But you better ask him yourself.

Hi Christoph, Andrew,

Thanks! I've bounced the original mail to him. Andrew, I guess I should use your LF address for the AUTHORS file, right?

Quoted 6 lines · On Fri, 9 May 2025 21:11:50 +0200 Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> wrote:

Quoted 4 lines · Christoph Lameter (Ampere)

Also regarding Andrew Morton's email address: I dont think osdl.org is still valid. He uses linuxfoundation.org these days.
But you better ask him yourself.

Quoted 4 lines

Hi Christoph, Andrew,

Thanks! I've bounced the original mail to him. Andrew, I guess I should use your LF address for the AUTHORS file, right?

@osdl.org @linuxfoundation.org @linux-foundation.org @linux.com @kernel.org all work. I normally use (the outdated) @linux-foundation.org

Hi,

I've no objection to the change.
Only after I searched the list I recalled there was some "boot.7" man page I wrote many years ago.

So this change actually promote me to a "contributor to the Linux man-pages project", instead of someone that wrote a small and unimportant man-page years ago ;-)

Thank you, the real contributors that are maintaining this for years.

--
Oron Peled

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 26 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

	$ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
	| grep '^-[^-]' \
	| grep @ \
	| grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
	| sed 's/,//g' \
	| sed 's/\.$//' \
	| sed 's/.*(//' \
	| sed 's/<//' \
	| sed 's/>//' \
	| sed 's/\.)//' \
	| sed 's/)//' \
	| sort \
	| uniq \
	| sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 84 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 26 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Signature · 2 lines

Cheers,
Carlos.

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Signature · 1 line

<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

Hi all,

I've added to BCC everyone whose copyright notices have been removed (those that noted an email). The full thread for this discussion can be found here:
<https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/jpin2dbnp5vpitnh7l4qmvkamzq3h3xljzsznrudgioox3nn72@57uybxbe3h4p/T/#u>

Please let me know if it's okay to you to transform your copyright notices to make them uniform? That is, do you approve
<https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657>
in what affects you?

I've generated the BCC with

        $ git show 9f2986c34166085225bb5606ebfd4952054e1657 -- man \
        | grep '^-[^-]' \
        | grep @ \
        | grep -o '[^     ]*@[^ ]*' \
        | sed 's/,//g' \
        | sed 's/\.$//' \
        | sed 's/.*(//' \
        | sed 's/<//' \
        | sed 's/>//' \
        | sed 's/\.)//' \
        | sed 's/)//' \
        | sort \
        | uniq \
        | sed 's/^/Bcc: /';

Have a lovely day!
Alex

Quoted 76 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Carlos,

Quoted 31 lines · Carlos O'Donell

Quoted 30 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

Quoted 11 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 9 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Quoted 6 lines · G. Branden Robinson

If you do this, I suggest you replace these lines with something like:

.\" See the Git revision history at
.\" $URL
.\" for records of changes and contributors to this file.

Good idea.

Quoted 7 lines

I'm thinking I won't do that. I don't want to add that overhead to each page. People interested in the history of a page will already have a look at the git history, and there they'll find the old states of a page, in which they'll find this information.

And it would require some non-trivial work to add this note consistently. I'll go with a removal without replacement, I think.

Acknowledged. It's been a whole 7 weeks for so, so I don't clearly remember my reasoning from February, but my suggestion may have been at attempt to find a "conservative" alteration to file content or the expressed meaning of the comments.

But, what's conservative in one dimension often is not in another, such as "labor required".

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

I also agree that while Git is a complex suite of tools, "git log" is not among its deeper magicks. At least not when run without arguments.

We did something similar in glibc and created a CONTRIBUTED-BY file at the top-level and moved all contribution lines out of the respective files into the top-level file.

Yep, a CREDITS file would be interesting. I wouldn't keep info about which specific files were written by each contributor. That seems something more appripriate for git-log(1). The pre-git contributions will be visible in old versions of the pages (i.e., if one sees Jane Random Developer in CREDITS and wonders which pages she contributed to, they can git log -S 'Jane Random Developer' and similar commands to find out.

Thanks!

Have a lovely night!
Alex

Quoted 21 lines

e.g.
~~~
The glibc project stopped adding "Contributed by" lines to source files in 2012 in favour of acknowledging contributors in the glibc manual and through the git log. The record of existing "Contributed by" lines have now been moved to this file to acknowledge contributions by these developers to glibc.

argp/argp-test.c:
Written by Miles Bader <[email protected]>.

argp/tst-argp1.c:
Contributed by Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>, 2002.
...
~~~
The top-level CONTRIBUTED-BY has ~3,000 Contributed/Written by lines.

Sme of the authors predated the use of git and so it was simpler to keep the lines somewhere as part of the transition away from "Contributed by"-style lines.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

--
Cheers,
Carlos.

--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Hi Branden,

[Subject reformed to the topic of in-source records of contribution]

Quoted 10 lines · G. Branden Robinson

Hi Alex,

At 2025-02-12T21:26:20+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
[...]

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines

.\" Modified 2004-06-24 by aeb
.\" Modified, 2004-11-30, after idea from [email protected]
+.\" Modified 2025-02-12, after correction from <[email protected]>

We don't update those anymore. We now rely on the metadata in git(1).

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

Okay, time has come to open this melon. :)

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

Quoted 1 line

Okay, time has come to open this melon. :)

In strace, FWIW, we have the following:
* the copyright notice looks like "Copyright (c) <year>-<year> The
strace developers.";

* we have a script [1] to consistently add/update those before the release;
* strace(1) refers to CREDITS for the list of contributors, which is
generated for the dist tarball by [2];
* dist tarball also has ChangeLog, that is generated from git history by [3].

That way, there's minimal attribution noise in the files, and some minimum level of attribution is done for the distribution tarball.

[1] https://gitlab.com/strace/strace/-/blob/master/maint/update_copyright_years.sh
[2] https://gitlab.com/strace/strace/-/blob/master/Makefile.am#L112
[3] https://gitlab.com/strace/strace/-/blob/master/Makefile.am#L101

Signature · 3 lines

Eugene Syromyatnikov
mailto:[email protected]
xmpp:esyr@jabber.{ru|org}

Hi Eugene,

Quoted 7 lines · Eugene Syromyatnikov

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Every now and then, I consider if I should just remove all of those lines, to avoid confusing people. If anyone is interested in the history before git(1), one can certainly look at those lines in old versions of the pages. Anyone reading the mailing list opposes removing those lines? (I'll ask again before removing anything, with a proper subject line.)

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 1 line

Okay, time has come to open this melon. :)

In strace, FWIW, we have the following:
* the copyright notice looks like "Copyright (c) <year>-<year> The
strace developers.";

Hmmm, interesting. And actually, it's more accurate than the usual copyright lines.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines

In strace, FWIW, we have the following:
* the copyright notice looks like "Copyright (c) <year>-<year> The
strace developers.";

Hmmm, interesting. And actually, it's more accurate than the usual copyright lines.

The value of the line "Copyright (c) The Foo Developers" is to indicate that the works are copyrighted, and it avoids anyone who infringes from arguing they "didn't know." It is in itself not a copyright statement.

What value is there in maintaining the year?

Note:
Copyright Notices in Open Source Software Projects (Steve Winslow)
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/blog/copyright-notices-in-open-source-software-projects

Quoted 3 lines · Alejandro Colomar

Hi Eugene,

On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 08:00:19PM +0200, Eugene Syromyatnikov wrote:

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 3 lines

In strace, FWIW, we have the following:
* the copyright notice looks like "Copyright (c) <year>-<year> The
strace developers.";

Quoted 2 lines

Hmmm, interesting. And actually, it's more accurate than the usual copyright lines.

The value of the line "Copyright (c) The Foo Developers" is to indicate that the works are copyrighted, and it avoids anyone who infringes from arguing they "didn't know." It is in itself not a copyright statement.

What value is there in maintaining the year?