Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 09:55:40 -0400 Message-Id: <200210171355.g9HDteI24540@envy.delorie.com> X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT delorie DOT com using -f From: DJ Delorie To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <3DAEA26C.A6C22E08@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (message from Richard Dawe on Thu, 17 Oct 2002 12:43:40 +0100) Subject: Re: Updating the copyright on sources References: <3DAEA26C DOT A6C22E08 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Does updating the copyright on the sources require the copyright to be > updated? E.g.: If a file was changed in 2001, copyright.pl adds a copyright > 2001 message. Do we then need to add a copyright 2002 message, because we've > modified the file in 2002? Tricky question, because it depends on when we consider the changes "released". For our purposes, I consider it released when it hits CVS, since the cvs repository is public. Thus, the checkin date is the copyright date. I do not think we should update the copyright date just because we updated the copyright message, however, our method of doing so changes the cvs checkin date. I suppose either year is appropriate in those cases, but it's probably a good idea to run the copyright script each year in December to make it cleaner. > PS: src/copyrite.cpp still uses utime to set the file time. I see > you fixed src/copyright.pl not to do this, so CVS notices the file > has changed. Should src/copyrite.cpp have its utime call commented > out? Probably. I don't use copyright.cpp any more, and since I was the only one doing the updates at the time, I never changed it.