Hacker News Reader

Comment by menaerus | Hacker News Reader

It matters because it completely weakens their point of stance and make them look unreasonable. Header is irrelevant since it isn't copyright infringement, and FWIW when it has been corrected (in the MR), then they decided that the MR is too complex for them and closed the whole issue. Ridiculous.

View on HN

An incorrect copyright header is a major red flag for non technical reasons. If you think it is an irrelevant minor matter then you do not undesirable several very important social and legal aspects of the issue.

Social maybe yes what legal aspects? Everybody keeps repeating that but there is no copyright infringement. Maybe you can point me to one?

I understand that people are uncomfortable with this, I am likely too, but objectively looking there's technically nothing wrong or different to what humans already do.

The point is that it ended up in the PR in the first place. The submitted seemed unaware of its presence and only looked into it after it was pointed out. This is sloppy and is a major red flag.

So there's no point? Sloppy maybe yes but technically incorrect or legally questionable no. Struggle is real

If the submitter is sloppy with things that are not complicated, how can one be sure of things that ARE complicated?

The funny thing is that it works, have a look at the MR. It says:

  All existing tests pass. Additional DWARF tests verify:

  DWARF structure (DW_TAG_compile_unit, DW_TAG_subprogram).
  Breakpoints by function and line in both GDB and LLDB.
  Type information and variable visibility.
  Correct multi-object linking.
  Platform-specific relocation handling.

So the burden of proof is obviously not anymore on the MR submitter side but the other.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com