Closed Bug 507387 Opened 11 years ago Closed 8 years ago

Update license blocks to use "Mozilla Foundation" instead of "Mozilla Corporation"

Categories

(mozilla.org :: Licensing, task, minor)

task
Not set
minor

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: whimboo, Assigned: gerv)

References

()

Details

Attachments

(2 files, 1 obsolete file)

Given by an email conversation with Gerv about the license block for Mozmill I have detected that a lot of existing files in our repository have a line for the Initial Developer which lists the Mozilla Corporation. In detail are these 925 files. Those should list Mozilla Foundation as Initial Developer instead.

> The Initial Developer of the Original Code is Mozilla Corporation.

=>

> The Initial Developer of the Original Code is Mozilla Foundation.

Given by Gerv this change has a minor priority but we should take care for new files.
Whiteboard: [good first bug]
Thanks for the patch Metal Sonic. Gerv, who can review this patch?
Assignee: hecker → kidlinux96
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
(In reply to comment #2)
> Thanks for the patch Metal Sonic. Gerv, who can review this patch?

You're welcome.
I've looked at the patch. It appears to be as advertised: It changes the Initial Developer statements in comments to reference "Mozilla Foundation" instead of "Mozilla Corporation", and makes no other changes.
Say, has anyone pushed this yet?
(In reply to comment #4)
> I've looked at the patch. It appears to be as advertised: It changes the
> Initial Developer statements in comments to reference "Mozilla Foundation"
> instead of "Mozilla Corporation", and makes no other changes.

Frank, can you give r+? Do we need a 2nd reviewer or a super review too?
Comment on attachment 417543 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to mozilla-central made using find-and-replace
[Checkin: Comment 8]

r=gerv.

Gerv
Attachment #417543 - Flags: review+
Fixed on trunk:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/641a22b4100a

Gerv
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
How should we handle branches? I believe we wanna fix the license block there too. The best would be to have new patches for 1.9.2 and 1.9.1?
Keywords: checkin-needed
We aren't going to sue ourselves, so while it's good to get this tidied up going forward, it's not worth bothering branch drivers with. They have more important things to think about :-)

Gerv
Aren't there many more occurrences yet?
Indeed. There are a couple left:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=Mozilla+Corporation
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Indeed. There are a couple left:
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=Mozilla+Corporation

Oops. I didn't know that ALL of the Mozilla Corp. references were wrong.
I guess I'll get on that, only 907 lines to go, <sigh>.
They aren't _all_ wrong. Only where the Mozilla Corporation is claimed to be a copyright holder. Don't do a straight global search and replace for the string "Mozilla Corporation"! :-)

Gerv
Thanks for the catch there.
Here is another patch that fixes some of the Inital Dev. statements that my find-and-replace missed(all in /netwerk/ I think).
Why "part 1"? Well, considering that there were _907_ occurrences of "Mozilla Corporation", I thought it would be better to release this in chunks.
Attachment #418865 - Flags: review?(gerv)
Depends on: 536408
Comment on attachment 418865 [details] [diff] [review]
Another patch to mozilla-central, part 1


A lot of files are included as a whole: EOL issues!?
Comment on attachment 418865 [details] [diff] [review]
Another patch to mozilla-central, part 1

indeed, this patch is whacked.
Attachment #418865 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #418865 - Flags: review?(gerv)
Gerv, should we use "Mozilla Foundation" or "the Mozilla Foundation" or "The Mozilla Foundation"?
If you are generating new patches, use "the Mozilla Foundation". But let's not change the old stuff. There's already too much energy diverted into this bug :-)

Gerv
Attachment #417543 - Attachment description: Patch to mozilla-central made using find-and-replace → Patch to mozilla-central made using find-and-replace [Checkin: Comment 8]
(In reply to comment #12)
> Indeed. There are a couple left:
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=Mozilla+Corporation

Also need to search for "Mozilla Corp", as I've found that in several places.
(In reply to comment #21)
> Also need to search for "Mozilla Corp", as I've found that in several places.

http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=Mozilla+Corp%5B%5Eo%5D&regexp=1&case=1
Found 59 matching lines in 59 files
Status: REOPENED → ASSIGNED
Apparently, "mozilla.org" is also being used in places as the initial developer. :(
Also, "Mozilla Messaging, Inc." should be "Mozilla Foundation", too, aiui.
Depends on: 553804
Depends on: 555557
All that changes were using "Mozilla Foundation" instead of "the Mozilla Foundation". As written by Gerv a while back (http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2010/02/mpl_initial_developer_for_mozilla_employ.html), shall we worry about that now?
The "the" is a grammatical rather than a legal point. So if there are future patches, use "the", but it's not worth doing these again.

Gerv
Depends on: 562262
Relinquishing assignment due to chronic absence.
Assignee: kidlinux96 → gerv
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Based on Serge's MXR search, I changed the Initial Developer from "Mozilla Corp" to "the Mozilla Foundation" across some files.
Comment on attachment 518636 [details] [diff] [review]
Replace "Mozilla Corp" with "the Mozilla Foundation" as Initial Developer
[Checked in: Comment 33]

Just had a glance at it: looks good to me. f+.
Attachment #518636 - Flags: review?(gerv)
Attachment #518636 - Flags: feedback+
Attachment #518636 - Flags: review?(gerv) → review+
Attachment #518636 - Flags: review+ → review?(gerv)
Tyler, any reason you re-requested review from Gerv?
Comment on attachment 518636 [details] [diff] [review]
Replace "Mozilla Corp" with "the Mozilla Foundation" as Initial Developer
[Checked in: Comment 33]

Look, guys, I don't see this as a priority. If you want to fix it, knock yourselves out :-) Can I trust you not to break anything? Good. Automatic r+ from me on patches which _just_ do what this one does and update the ID (no other types of change, even other comments).

Gerv
Attachment #518636 - Flags: review?(gerv) → review+
My apologies for the duplicate review request. I didn't even realize that a review request had already been made. Thanks for pointing that out, Reed :)
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/0f4ec85e7a0c
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago9 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Is there a reason why all the new versions did not follow the boilerplate on how this is supposed to be done?  See https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/boilerplate-1.1/mpl-tri-license-c

(specifically, Mozilla Foundation should be been on a new line)
Well, "the Mozilla Foundation" should have been in a new line, but probably doesn't matter much.

The problem here, is that I can still find a lot of entries just searching "mozilla corp" in mxr, more than 200 entries, since I don't see any indication of the bug being limited to a certain subpath of the codebase, the bug itself doesn't yet look fixed (even if it did a really nice advancement).
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
sdwilsh: ideally, we would follow the boilerplate exactly, but this variation is not one which will cause any scripts to barf (they have to be able to cope with a variety of existing practices). 

Gerv
Attachment #518636 - Attachment description: Replace "Mozilla Corp" with "the Mozilla Foundation" as Initial Developer → Replace "Mozilla Corp" with "the Mozilla Foundation" as Initial Developer [Checked in: Comment 33]
Status: REOPENED → NEW
Whiteboard: [good first bug] → [good first bug][mentor=gerv]
This block style is going away in favour of the MPL 2.

Gerv
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago8 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Whiteboard: [good first bug][mentor=gerv]
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.