| 1 |
On Fri, 05 May 2017 18:55:41 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On pią, 2017-05-05 at 10:35 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 5 |
> > # Copyright 2017 Gentoo Foundation |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Aren't we supposed to use the full range of years here? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
It applies when something comes into existing. If this eclass did not |
| 10 |
exist in 2016, a copyright for that year would not be correct. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
This maybe different for ebuilds, as that could be considered derived |
| 13 |
from the original ebuild. First one ever written. I am not sure the |
| 14 |
same applies to eclasses, but it might. In that case the year of the |
| 15 |
first eclass would be correct. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I guess it is safe to always use the oldest year. Most important is |
| 18 |
that it has the current year if anything. Like things in tree that are |
| 19 |
copyright 2016. Could have another copyright for 2017. Just as an |
| 20 |
example, not really something of concern. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Though likely would be good to have a script that runs annually to |
| 23 |
update all copyrights to current year. I do some of that myself and |
| 24 |
need to do more.... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Additional reading |
| 27 |
http://www.copyrightlaws.com/international/copyright-notice-year/ |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives