• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 8 replies
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 418 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TivaWare version and copyright information in source headers

selene58944
Prodigy 160 points

Hello.

I think it would be great if you (TI team) avoid to put version and copyright informations in the header (comment) of any source file.

In fact this habit interfere with the use of any version control software (ie, git or even a simple diff program) because every file results different even if nothing is actually changed. So it's very difficult to find all the differences from the previous version.

You could create a separated version informations file and make all the source headers as identical.

Thanks for your attention.

Bye

Mario

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 244400 points
    Hello Mario,

    The version control information is important to be kept in the files and is mandated by TI policy. Note that all users use git or a version control system and most of them in fact use local machines to store the software.

    Regards
    Amit
  • 0 in reply to Amit Ashara
    Prodigy 160 points
    Hello Amit,

    Thank you for the prompt reply.
    I am sure that almost all users use git or something like that, and that is the reason why I allowed myself to report this issue.

    I hope that many people follow my post in order to convince TI to change source versioning policy ;-)

    Regards
    Mario
  • 0 in reply to selene58944
    TI__Guru**** 244400 points
    Hello Selene

    TivaWare is also repo'ed in git but we use build scripts to make the conversion. You can do the reverse process as well.

    Not may users have a version control system (though I know some do). The change in policy is dictated by the Type of License. I am not sure if it can be changed (every product group will have to change the license).

    Regards
    Amit
  • 0 in reply to Amit Ashara
    Guru 27665 points

    We do use a version control system (and keep TIVA source in it) and I agree with you Amit. Version and copyright information belong in the header. Copyright especially belongs there.

    It serves two purposes Mario, one is to maintain acknowledgement of copyright. Without that note copyright gets separated and lost from the source and the source ends up unattributed and copyright free. There may be legal implications to this, there are certainly logistical/moral implications.

    The second purpose is to provide the reader an indication of what version the file is. This could be done for the entire library in a separate file but is difficult to do on an individual file basis. If this was a public Git repository it would be possible to use the history to track back versions but there are good reasons to make a library like this available sans repository and so the version info in the header is a near requirement.

    There are comparison tools that I find generally fairly easy to use that would make this sort of comparison easy. And IIRC there are visual front ends to Git that also have pretty reasonable visual compares.

    I know there are philosophical and good technical reasons that Git does not support maintaining version information in the archived files but I've always seen it as a bit of a weakness, along with it's mediocre support for archiving binaries.

    Robert

  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Prodigy 160 points
    OK, I must surrender to a "Mastermind" supporting a "Guru" :-)

    Robert and Amit, I agree with many concepts you expressed in your posts but, from the point of view of a simple developer which is not so involved in legal issues, I think my question was not so senseless.

    Thank you again for your attention.
    Regards
    Mario
  • 0 in reply to selene58944
    TI__Guru**** 244400 points
    Hello Selene,

    Don't go by the "Status" (I will speak for myself as i am engineer at the end of the day). Your point understood but on legal ramifications it cannot be done to have a "non-versioned non-copyright" software.

    Regards
    Amit
  • 0 in reply to selene58944
    Guru 117855 points

    selene58944 said:
    point of view of a simple developer which is not so involved in legal issues

    Suggest you add, "Yet" to (properly) complete that sentence.

    You realize that, "Ignorance of the law" proves less than effective as a, "Defense."

    Small, simple developers may seek to grow/expand - (some) compliance & recognition of "Big Biz" realities may make (more) sense...

  • 0 in reply to selene58944
    Guru 27665 points

    selene58944 said:
    not so involved in legal issues

    Heh, as cb1 points out there is a difference between "not involved" and "not potentially affected".  It is a good idea to take notice of those areas which may potentially cause you problems later.

    However, as a comment more generally covering notices in source files, I think that the moral issue may be more important. Creators are due credit for their work, especially when that is the only coin in which they are paid.

    selene58944 said:
    OK, I must surrender to a "Mastermind" supporting a "Guru" :-)

    The number of posts made is a poor measure of their quality. Although Amit's are generally well done.

    Robert