sounds good :)
Zitat von Kevin Rushforth :
Then we might decide not to request a change in review if only the
copyright is not updated?
Yes, this is a good idea. I don't generally flag this in my reviews,
for example. The exceptions would be: 1) if a new file springs to
life with the
> Then we might decide not to request a change in review if only the
copyright is not updated?
Yes, this is a good idea. I don't generally flag this in my reviews, for
example. The exceptions would be: 1) if a new file springs to life with
the wrong initial copyright year; 2) if an incorrect
Okay, thanks for the info :)
Then we might decide not to request a change in review if only the
copyright is not updated? If the second reviewers does it after the
first already approved, the first has to re-approve - additional
bureaucratic work and might lead to a bit of time lag
Not that I know of. FWIW, I'm not too bothered by this, since I run a
script 2-3 times a year to update the copyright years for those files
fixed in the current year.
-- Kevin
On 4/13/2020 3:48 AM, Jeanette Winzenburg wrote:
Seeing that missing to update of copyright year in the header is
Seeing that missing to update of copyright year in the header is
rather common (in my own pull requests as well as in others :) is
there any means to do so automatically or some source tool (for me
that would be for Eclipse) that would do on request?
-- Jeanette
