8212088: Missing copyright notices for property files

[kevinrushforth]

This PR adds missing copyright header blocks for several properties files, script files, and textual data files (e.g., fxml, css) that do not have them. Where feasible, all non-trivial textual files in the repo should have a proper copyright header.

Notes to Reviewers

• This PR is targeted to the jfx17 branch.
• There are two commits that can be reviewed separately, if you prefer. The first covers most of the files, and adds a copyright header with a GPL v2 + classpath license. The second is for the apps/samples only, which adds a copyright header with a BSD-style license.

---

Progress

• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

• JDK-8212088: Missing copyright notices for property files

Reviewers

• Johan Vos (@johanvos - Reviewer)
• Ambarish Rapte (@arapte - Reviewer)
• Ajit Ghaisas (@aghaisas - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/591/head:pull/591
$ git checkout pull/591

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/591
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/591/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 591

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 591

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/591.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back kcr! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into jfx17 will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[kevinrushforth]

/reviewers 2

[openjdk]

@kevinrushforth
The number of required reviews for this PR is now set to 2 (with at least 1 of role reviewers).

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (50b030be)

[johanvos]

Is there a reason why the samples have a BSD license while the others have GPL + CPE? (not that I'm against BSD, just wondering)

[kevinrushforth]

Yes. All of JavaFX is licensed under GPL except for the sample applications under apps/samples, which are licensed under BSD (apps/scenebuilder was similarly licensed under BSD before it was removed from the repo).

[kevinrushforth]

I should add, that the JDK samples are similarly licensed under BSD, so JavaFX followed suit (the JavaFX samples are bundled with the JDK samples in JDK 8).

[arapte]

Looks good to me.

[openjdk]

@kevinrushforth This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8212088: Missing copyright notices for property files

Reviewed-by: jvos, arapte, aghaisas

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 2 new commits pushed to the jfx17 branch:

• 78a3721: 8271086: Block comments of form '/***' are treated as javadoc comments
• 2cd5d1f: 8240640: [macos] Wrong focus behaviour with multiple Alerts

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the jfx17 branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the jfx17 branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[kevinrushforth]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit df07ac8.
Since your change was applied there have been 2 commits pushed to the jfx17 branch:

• 78a3721: 8271086: Block comments of form '/***' are treated as javadoc comments
• 2cd5d1f: 8240640: [macos] Wrong focus behaviour with multiple Alerts

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@kevinrushforth Pushed as commit df07ac8.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.