Thread: Copyright

Copyright

From
"Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
I have been noticing that the copyright is wrong on many files (2005)... 
Do we have a utility to update the copyright?

J



Re: Copyright

From
Tom Lane
Date:
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> I have been noticing that the copyright is wrong on many files (2005)... 
> Do we have a utility to update the copyright?

We update those strings at major releases.
        regards, tom lane


Re: Copyright

From
mark@mark.mielke.cc
Date:
Sorry... deleted the post I am responding to too quickly...

The question was whether there was a program to bring the files up to date.

Why? The code was written, and copyrighted, at the time that it was
submitted. Unless the code has been completely re-written, the original
copyright date applies.

After all - you wouldn't want somebody to say that PostgreSQL copied
them, because the date was later, would you? :-)

Cheers,
mark

-- 
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com     __________________________
.  .  _  ._  . .   .__    .  . ._. .__ .   . . .__  | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/    |_     |\/|  |  |_  |   |/  |_   | 
|  | | | | \ | \   |__ .  |  | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__  | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
 One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all                      and in the darkness
bindthem...
 
                          http://mark.mielke.cc/



Re: Copyright

From
Matteo Beccati
Date:
Mark,

> After all - you wouldn't want somebody to say that PostgreSQL copied
> them, because the date was later, would you? :-)

I think it won't be hard to understand what "Copyright (c) 1996-2006" 
means ;)


Best regards
--
Matteo Beccati
http://phpadsnew.com
http://phppgads.com


Re: Copyright

From
mark@mark.mielke.cc
Date:
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 12:02:19PM +0100, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> >After all - you wouldn't want somebody to say that PostgreSQL copied
> >them, because the date was later, would you? :-)
> I think it won't be hard to understand what "Copyright (c) 1996-2006" 
> means ;)

Maybe... but if it hasn't changed...

Of course, that whole line has no legal value in North America anyways...

Cheers,
mark

-- 
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com     __________________________
.  .  _  ._  . .   .__    .  . ._. .__ .   . . .__  | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/    |_     |\/|  |  |_  |   |/  |_   | 
|  | | | | \ | \   |__ .  |  | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__  | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
 One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all                      and in the darkness
bindthem...
 
                          http://mark.mielke.cc/



Re: Copyright

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
mark@mark.mielke.cc wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 12:02:19PM +0100, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> > >After all - you wouldn't want somebody to say that PostgreSQL copied
> > >them, because the date was later, would you? :-)
> > I think it won't be hard to understand what "Copyright (c) 1996-2006" 
> > means ;)
> 
> Maybe... but if it hasn't changed...
> 
> Of course, that whole line has no legal value in North America anyways...

The file is /src/tools/copyright.  We don't re-run it for minor releases
because there are almost no changes in minor releases.  If we did run
it, it would change a lot of code for little purpose.

--  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us SRA OSS, Inc.   http://www.sraoss.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


Re: Copyright

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> The file is /src/tools/copyright.  We don't re-run it for minor releases
> because there are almost no changes in minor releases.  If we did run
> it, it would change a lot of code for little purpose.

It might make sense to run it once a year in early January, rather than
tying the update to releases.  In any case we'd only run it on CVS HEAD
--- I agree that updating the notices in the back branches would just
cause code churn.
        regards, tom lane


Re: Copyright

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > The file is /src/tools/copyright.  We don't re-run it for minor releases
> > because there are almost no changes in minor releases.  If we did run
> > it, it would change a lot of code for little purpose.
> 
> It might make sense to run it once a year in early January, rather than
> tying the update to releases.  In any case we'd only run it on CVS HEAD
> --- I agree that updating the notices in the back branches would just
> cause code churn.

Right.  I usually do run it earlier in the year, but was delayed this
time.

--  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us SRA OSS, Inc.   http://www.sraoss.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +