Re: svn commit: r312664 - in /cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event: ./ aspect/ aspect/impl/ impl/ subscriber/impl/
Carsten Ziegeler wrote: Sylvain Wallez wrote: Isn't "1999-2005" enough? Well, actually yes, and to be honest "1999" is wrong anyway as the code has been written later...but I don't want to touch the "old values", I'm just adding the year of the latest change (which is actually not really required). Most of our copyright definitions are totally wrong, as mostly they were just copy/pasted from some other source :( We are going to get rid of copyright definitions anyway, since the ASF does not, in fact, own that copyright, but it remains ownership of the people that wrote it. The ASF owns a license to it. My suggestion, don't spend time on this, as the board will resolve the issue soon and invoke a directive for all the projects to follow (hopefully with some source code cleanup scripts to enable it) -- Stefano.
Re: svn commit: r312664 - in /cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event: ./ aspect/ aspect/impl/ impl/ subscriber/impl/
Carsten Ziegeler wrote: Sylvain Wallez wrote: Isn't "1999-2005" enough? Well, actually yes, and to be honest "1999" is wrong anyway as the code has been written later...but I don't want to touch the "old values", I'm just adding the year of the latest change (which is actually not really required). Most of our copyright definitions are totally wrong, as mostly they were just copy/pasted from some other source :( Carsten I've mentioned this before, but the copyright only needs to be the first year (i.e. the year the work was created). We don't have to keep updating them. In fact, I mentioned this to Carsten at the GetTogther and he was quite aware of it. I guess you just like doing it! Ralph
Re: svn commit: r312664 - in /cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event: ./ aspect/ aspect/impl/ impl/ subscriber/impl/
Sylvain Wallez wrote: > > Isn't "1999-2005" enough? > Well, actually yes, and to be honest "1999" is wrong anyway as the code has been written later...but I don't want to touch the "old values", I'm just adding the year of the latest change (which is actually not really required). Most of our copyright definitions are totally wrong, as mostly they were just copy/pasted from some other source :( Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
Re: svn commit: r312664 - in /cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event: ./ aspect/ aspect/impl/ impl/ subscriber/impl/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: cziegeler Date: Mon Oct 10 08:20:02 2005 New Revision: 312664 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=312664&view=rev --- cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event/ActionEvent.java (original) +++ cocoon/blocks/portal/trunk/java/org/apache/cocoon/portal/event/ActionEvent.java Mon Oct 10 08:20:02 2005 @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@ /* - * Copyright 1999-2002,2004 The Apache Software Foundation. - * + * Copyright 1999-2002,2004-2005 The Apache Software Foundation. + * Isn't "1999-2005" enough? Sylvain -- Sylvain WallezAnyware Technologies http://people.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
