On Apr 19, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 08:31:25AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 4/19/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Before I t/r 1.3, I'll be updating the files to reflect the
new copyright. We can determine some better way of doing it
post-release :)
No. Please do not update any copyright years.
Eek, This has already been done, for trunk and for the 3 branches.
We are only supposed to indicate the year of *first* publication.
That won't have changed, so I don't think the update will have caused
any harm.
Ah, fer cryin out loud. If this was actually needed, I would have
done it before the first release of the year. I thought we already
had this discussion and I said don't update the years, but that may
have been a different dev list.
In any case, it requires great care -- you actually changed at
least one (maybe more) copyright lines belonging to other people,
which is somewhat illegal. I really like all the energy you have
going right now, but we can't do a release until the commits are
checked and stuff like
--- httpd/httpd/trunk/server/util_pcre.c (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/trunk/server/util_pcre.c Wed Apr 19 05:23:42 2006
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
Written by: Philip Hazel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Copyright (c) 1997-2004 University of Cambridge
+ Copyright (c) 1997-2006 University of Cambridge
reverted.
Please let's just stick with what we have until Cliff gives a
definitive ruling. I really would like to get this resolved soon,
but
we're also going to be altering the license block as well. (What
Jackrabbit just used is fairly close to what we should use, but I'd
like legal review before we switch all projects to it.) -- justin
We had a legal review last year, and the review said that what we had
been doing is incorrect and the replacement text is fine. It has simply
been held up because Cliff changed priorities. Jackrabbit used the text
that the lawyers approved.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/trunk/jackrabbit/HEADER.txt
The only thing I would change is the phrase from our existing headers
"you may not use this file except in compliance"
which I think was copied from MPL. I would have preferred a more
positive statement, but that would have required another review.
I have a script that does the conversion, which I'll add to committers.
Note that I didn't have a choice with Jackrabbit. I know exactly
who owns the copyright and I did the paperwork for the licenses, so
(IMO) that choice was to obey the law (as described by ASF attorneys)
or not. httpd has more leeway since it is such an old project, but
I would like the board to make a decision soon.
....Roy
