On 03/31/2010 08:45 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 03/31/2010 04:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>>> The intent is fine, but most of these scripts have not been >>>> touched in 2010, so shouldn't have their copyright date extended >>> >>> That policy has been changed. >>> Now, it's recommended to update all files once per year, >>> regardless of whether they've been changed in that particular year. >> >> In that case my personal copyright line should be updated at the same time >> as updating the Red Hat copyright line :-) > > But if you weren't the one making the changes, then what copyright > interest do you have in 2010? You have the original copyright, but by > adding it to a Red Hat repository, didn't you effectively transfer > copyright ownership of further changes to Red Hat? > > I'm happy to tweak the patch to drop 2010 from any file not otherwise > touched this year, if that's what you want. Or, I can even use gnulib's > update-copyright-year script to add 2010 globally; but would that be to > just the current holder, or to all previous copyright holders? For the record, I've pushed a modified version of the patch that only added the Inc. to the Red Hat copyright lines, without adding 2010 to any file that had not previously been touched this year. That way, we have deferred the debate of whether or not to do global copyright update to another day. -- Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list