On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:15:01AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > -1, there's been enough back and forth on this. The current status is > > that the existing candidate is good for release unless people start > > reverting their +1's, which so far - has not happened. > > As I have stated before, I believe it's completely inappropriate for > us to be releasing files with bogus copyright years.
I don't think there's any dispute over that. The question is whether this is important enough to waste another release cycle over. Faced with that, I don't see how a legal nit over the copyright line should cause people to have to go to the trouble of testing yet another candidate tarball. As we saw with APR, there are only so many unreleased candidates a group can take before they just stop bothering to test them. There is a complete lack of direction from ASF board/legal on this btw, despite your assertion. If you feel that strongly about it, veto the code change, and I'll tag and roll 2.0.58. -- Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
