-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 75
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Make alpaka REUSE compliant #2177
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | |||
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. <https://www.hzdr.de> | |||
# SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
CC0-1.0
is essentially the public domain.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you think it's necessary to also put these utility files under a license? I imagine their reusability severly limited.
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | |||
Format: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ | |||
Upstream-Name: alpaka | |||
Upstream-Contact: Jan Stephan <[email protected]> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should probably be someone else or a more general e-mail address.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uwe told me, that is not possible. We cannot create E-Mail addresses for organizations or projects.
04201d3
to
8f6c1a9
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think the distinction between copyright and contributor serves us. I contributed a lot during my free time, in which case I would like to be listed as a copyright holder and not a contributor. Also, I am technically not employed by CERN, only associated, so I don't know whether CERN holds any copyright on my work done during my PhD. Furthermore, any other of my affiliations (TU Dresden, HZDR, CASUS), or my funding provider (BMBF), could have reserved any rights (I don't know if this is the case). For the latter, the Gentner FAQ (my stipend) says: "The BMBF reserves any rights to use the results.", if you count alpaka as a result of my PhD.
I am generally very afraid, that this detailed tracking will create a lot of noise in general and also later during PR reviews. It also seems complicated for external contributors.
// Copyright (c) 2015-16 Tom Deakin, Simon McIntosh-Smith, | ||
// University of Bristol HPC | ||
// | ||
// For full license terms please see the LICENSE file distributed with this | ||
// source code | ||
// | ||
// Cupla version created by Jeff Young in 2021 | ||
// Ported from cupla to alpaka by Bernhard Manfred Gruber in 2022 | ||
/* | ||
* SPDX-FileCopyrightText: University of Bristol <https://www.bristol.ac.uk> | ||
* SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Georgia Institute of Technology <https://www.gatech.edu> | ||
* SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CERN) <https://www.cern.ch> | ||
* | ||
* SPDX-FileContributor: Tom Deakin <[email protected]> | ||
* SPDX-FileContributor: Simon McIntosh-Smith <[email protected]> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't this demoting Tom and Simon from copyright holders to contributors? That is a change of the legal situation, isn't it? What gives us the right to do this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. I'll ask them.
* Based on John D. McCalpin�s original STREAM benchmark for CPUs | ||
* Based on John D. McCalpin’s original STREAM benchmark for CPUs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Encoding?
Second occurence below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting, this didn't appear while I was writing the text in the initial comment. It also looks fine in my editor so this is probably some encoding issue in the license file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems to be an issue with GitHub's preview - apparently they don't use UTF-8. If you select "View file" this goes away.
I believe it is quite important. Example: You are going to leave us in a few months. Now let's assume that we want to relicense to any other open source license a few years down the road which isn't fully compatible with MPL-2.0. Are you allowed to agree to this? Or do we have to reach out to one or more of your affiliations? If the latter, how do we know them if we can no longer reach you (for whatever reason)?
I'll gladly change the copyright statements with regard to you or your affiliation(s) as long as they are correct. The BMBF statements sound like a promising start, at least with respect to LLAMA.
I mean, there is a reason why every major open-source project is concerned with this and why specifications such as SPDX, REUSE etc. have been created. In most cases, the copyright holder is either the employer (if you're paid to do the work) or yourself (if you're doing this in your free time). Any new contributor needs to figure this out exactly once if it is more complicated than that. |
Well, that's exactly an argument for me being the copyright holder. Otherwise, you would need to ask CERN for permission. Furthermore, I absolutely want you to contact me in 30 years if you intend to relicense alpaka. Otherwise, you could just change the license to proprietary, remove the Github repository and start selling the software as closed source :) Which I know you would never do. But I have made several contributions to this project, so I think I should be notified when the rights that I agreed to when contributing are subject to a revision.
I will inquire with the CERN OSPO what to do here. I am afraid, this may take a few days. Their quick response was that anything work related belongs to CERN, even when done in my free time.
Contributor status can change. I was employed by CASUS for 3 months, 3 years paid by the BMBF and associated to CERN, then CASUS got absorbed into HZDR, and my last 5 months are paid by CERN directly. I was registered as a PhD student at TU Dresden for the entire period. I am subject to different legal contracts in each of these periods, if we want to overanalyze the situation, which I don't want to do. I may also continue to contribute while being unemployed next year, or after getting a new job. Anyhow, I think we should aim for a simple solution here. |
You can't just decide to become a copyright holder.
Sounds like the copyright belongs to HZDR and CERN then, possibly BMBF. Unless you explicitly signed a copyright agreement with TUD they're not part of the list since German universities don't automatically become copyright holders of their PhD students' work. |
That's clear, but I can decide which chain of argumentation to pursue. |
You do not need to touch a file to contribute to it. Sometimes files are split or functions are moved around and the result is that your code ends up in a file you did not ever touch and where git was not able to track the copy. Sometimes this was tracked manually when the new file was created. |
Is it expected that I am listed both under |
I'm aware. I should have been more clear: in some cases a completely new feature was implemented and people would just copy the copyright header from another file. I looked at the history of each file and its predecessors to make sure I don't miss any contributor. Regarding your second question: in your case I added you to the copyright holders for all files you touched after you left HZDR. |
I conferred with the CERN OSPO and the Gentner coordinator. The copyright for my work as a Gentner funded PhD is held by CERN. |
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | |||
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. <https://www.hzdr.de> | |||
# SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you think it's necessary to also put these utility files under a license? I imagine their reusability severly limited.
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ | |||
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CERN) <https://www.cern.ch> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CERN) <https://www.cern.ch> | |
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: CERN |
I think CERN is enough here. See also: https://indico.cern.ch/category/4251/attachments/101/505/OSL-2012-01-Open_Source_Licences_at_CERN-Short_version.pdf
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | |||
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. <https://www.hzdr.de> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In germany a company can not have the copyright, this is different from other countries.
Kann ein Unternehmen ein Urheberrecht haben?
Nein, ein Urheberrecht für Unternehmen gibt es in Deutschland –
im Gegensatz etwa zum US-amerikanischen Recht als
„work made for hire“ – nicht.
Urheber eines Werkes ist in Deutschland immer die natürliche Person,
die das Werk geschaffen hat, niemals aber eine “Firma”. [...]
https://www.res-media.net/faq-zum-urheberrecht-fuer-unternehmen/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but maybe copyright
!= Urheberrecht
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK I think copyright
is Urheberrecht
. So the record you added is fine from the technical point of view but I do not think we should apply these changes. Because if we would like to change the license of the project we need the OK from the legal departments of the institutions where we currently need the OK from the contributors.
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | |||
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. <https://www.hzdr.de> | |||
# SPDX-FileContributor: Benjamin Worpitz <[email protected]> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Benjamin contributed under the affiliation of HZDR and TUD, later partly as a pure open-source developer or LogMeIn employee, I do not know exactly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I only contributed for TUD, HZDR and as open-source developer. I did not contribute in the name of any other companies ;-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Were HZDR and TU Dresden in parallel? Also do you remember when you left HZDR? Until now I used 2017-12-31 as the cutoff between "HZDR" and "not HZDR" because that is when I joined and I don't remember you ;-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Were HZDR and TU Dresden in parallel?
TUD and HZDR were likely in parallel.
Also do you remember when you left HZDR?
Officially this should have been 2015-09-31
This PR makes alpaka conform to the REUSE specification: https://reuse.software/
This is done by applying the following changes:
.zenodo.json
) were placed into the public domain - please tell me if you wish this to be MPL, too.reuse
top-level directory with the requireddep5
fileLICENSES
directory.Fixes #1920. This is the last open issue for the 1.0 release.