Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3DAF4181.10C6FDC3@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 00:02:26 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Updating the copyright on sources
References: <3DAEA26C DOT A6C22E08 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <200210171355 DOT g9HDteI24540 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > 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.
[snip]

I ran the copyright.pl script and then checked the CVS logs for each file that
was modified. I added copyright lines for any years that had been missed out.
I checked the changes in.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]