[Cin] Working on adding GPL license attribution for all program files

Andrew Randrianasulu randrianasulu at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 03:48:42 CET 2023

сб, 7 янв. 2023 г., 03:02 Phyllis Smith <phylsmith2017 at gmail.com>:

> I mean LGPL is Library GPL a bit differently type of license from just GPL
>> .
> Andrew:
> Fixed and checked into GIT the corrections.  I had just grabbed one GPL
> header and did not read it.  So now "library" replaced by "program" and
> "Lesser" now gone.  (I should be more careful).
>> Well, I think in general template message is correct, just we need pay
>> attention when more than one author worked on it. You can look into
>> ffmpeg's sources for some examples. Dates for (c) usually not exact, but at
>> least year or range of years provided.
> Also, corrected the dates as best as I could.
> Next I want to add the "Contributors CV" line but I have not yet found the
> "merge" tar of around March 21, 2016 where CV, HV, and 5.0 were merged that
> was made for Beta testing of 5.1 and submitted (AND REJECTED) to
> Cinelerra-CV.  But I have not looked very hard yet other than in the email
> here.  I need this in order to determine the exact files that were used
> from CV.
> Question? did you come up with a good date for CV contributors?  Or should
> I use 2007-2016?

Cinelerra CV was active as project since early 2003 (cinelerra 1.1.* days!)
first in cvs, then in svn, then in git.

Try to download full history via git clone


git log in it, and then press "end" on keyboard.
you will see lines like r2, r9, r11 - those are ancient CVS revisions.

Now, one can wonder how much of this work survived into 2016? Files were
merged with HV (and sometimes back) but for example autoconf-based build
system was developed there and quite distinct from script HV uses. So, _as
a team_ I think their contributions still alive even if it be quite hard to
find exact lines from that time in current code. Yet, translations were
merged there, manual in 2007 too.

I wonder if manual a bit distinct and in our case heavy for referring from
source code tree? I mean, files like AUTHORS put in root of source tree
exactly because they more likely to read this way.

Originally (if you check r2 by copying its git hash as argument  to 'git
checkout -b r2 hash') you will see AUTHORS was empty and was  filled up

commit 19c569148c0c2742a9dabb42ee281bf498eee291
Author: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt at telecom.at>
Date:   Tue Jan 23 21:34:33 2007 +0000

    r985: Fill in the AUTHORS file with useful information.

    This file is used by a svn to git converter; hence, it must have this
particular syntax, which maps svn committer logins to names and emails.

    On the other hand, since this file lists only the svn logins, it is by
no means a complete list of authors. Many people have contributed, but are
not mentioned here. If you think you deserve attribution in this list, it
will be no problem to add your name, too (with some fake login name).

I think we do not plan to downgrade to SVN so our file might be simpler in
organization. Just authors, contact. (contact is email or website)

please also try to git log in unpacked google code archive, it provides
some info on merges before attempted beta release ( I'll look up email
archive at date you found)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/pipermail/cin/attachments/20230107/9f6e32c8/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Cin mailing list