ATLEDGE-553: Modify library examples header info

[bokibi]

No description provided.

[bokibi]

Moved all Copyright header information from Library folder to separate COPYRIGHT_XXX.README files.

[calvinatintel]

Hi Mike. We like the current style of license headers as it cleanly separates individual files with their respective licenses.

[calvinatintel]

Hi Mike. How about this solution?

Put this on the top of the files:

/*
 * Copyright (c) 2015 Intel Corporation.  All rights reserved.
 * See the bottom of this file for the license terms.
 */

then put this on the bottom of the file:

/*
   Copyright (c) 2015 Intel Corporation.  All rights reserved.

   This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
   modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
   License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
   version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

   This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
   Lesser General Public License for more details.

   You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
   License along with this library; if not, write to the Free Software
   Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
*/

Each file will contain the license terms for itself this way while keeping the top of the files cleaner.

[bokibi]

Hi Calvin,

Normally, the Copyright notice/license appears on top of source code or in a separate LICENSE file. In this case, I've created separate LICENSE files as you can see in my check-ins. If you think we need to move the license term of each file to the bottom of it, I am happy to do so. Please confirm :)

[SidLeung]

@bokibi Understood the normal format of the Copyright / license notification. To comply with the internal legal protocol and the Sketch appearance requirement, it is desirable to employ the layout specified above by Calvin. Thank you.

[bokibi]

Sure. Will do, Sid.

[calvinatintel]

Please remove this whiteline

[calvinatintel]

Sorry for the change request again. Can you please update the copyright year from 2015 to 2016?

[calvinatintel]

@bokibi ping

[bokibi]

Sure, @calvinatintel :)

[bokibi]

Hey Calvin - I just updated the the Intel Copyright date. Please let me know if I missing anything :) Thx.

[calvinatintel]

@bokibi @eriknyquist Can you please take a look at the conflict?

[eriknyquist]

Sneaking in a functional change ;)
I'm happy with this, usually not a fan of re-implementing std routines but in this case it does appear that
"strcmp" is indeed not behaving as advertised. I'll fix the conflict and merge it.

This seems odd to me since we are not using any home-made versions of strcmp, it just comes from the std. C++ lib (which, admittedly, comes with our toolchain). If there is an error in the libs shipped with our toolchain, I'd like to find it-- when was the first time you noticed this issue?

[calvinatintel]

Wuh.. this is not okay. I see a few more code changes in the PR. Perhaps the PR needs to be rebased to the tip?

[eriknyquist]

Oh yeah you're right, there are more functional changes that I missed. OK, so @bokibi can you please remove functional changes from this PR? leave header changes only, like the title suggests.

That said, I believe your "strcmp" re-implementation is a valid fix, and I would like to merge it also if we cannot fix the toolchain. Please make a new pull request for each functional change. And, like @calvinatintel says you'll probably need to rebase.

[SidLeung]

Agree with Calvin. It may require more work. However, for future referencing and categorizing, it is desirable to separate out issues into individual reports. It will also ensure the discussion, analysis of the issues will not be mixed together.

[bokibi]

​Agree. I will back out the change for strcmp issue. Erik, the issue was
found by Janet Y Scholar and assigned to me.

[eriknyquist]

There are 7 commits for this headers change, including 1 merge commit, 1 commit to revert the strcmp change, and 3 commits that are a mystery to me because they all have the same message. Can you clean it up please @bokibi ? rebase into a single commit for the header changes and remove all traces of strcmp changes.

[calvinatintel]

@eriknyquist This is replaced with #206