On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Phil Steitz wrote: > Stephen Colebourne wrote: > > I am planning on running licence update scripts across [collections] and > > [lang]. > > > > Any objections to the all file approach? Every file will get the same > > copyright dates. > > The guidlines here http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html > > say > > " Committers should update the copyright notice on the Apache License to > include the current year when they revise a source file. If it is 2002, > and you revise a source file from 1999, change the copyright notice in the > license to cite "1999, 2002". If the file was from 2001, we would change > it to 2001-2002. And so forth. This will happen most often in the early > part of a year, but maintenance of the copyright date should occur > year-round, as needed." > > That would indicate to me that what we should be doing is updating the > notices when we change files. One thing that we probably do *not* want to > do is to just replace the 2003 references with 2004, since that would make > the files from 2003 look like their protection began in 2004. > > Is there an ASF policy on this?
I'm not aware of an ASF policy per se, but what you quote above is correct according to (US and, I believe, UK) copyright law, and is what all of my employers, past and present, have required. -- Martin Cooper > > Phil > > > > > > > Stephen > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
