On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Thomas Munro >> <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> Shouldn't this say just "(c) 2016, PostgreSQL Global Development >>> Group"? Are we supposed to be blaming the University of California >>> for new files? > >> If the new file contains a portion of code from this age, yes. > > My habit has been to include the whole old copyright if there's anything > at all in the new file that could be considered to be copy-and-paste from > an existing file. Frequently it's a gray area.
Thanks. I see that it's warranted in this case, as code is recycled from MergeAppend. > Legally, I doubt anyone cares much. Morally, I see it as paying due > respect to those who came before us in this project. +1 -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
