Jalud Abdulmenan wrote: > With regard to changing the copyright notices, the only issue to resolve > is to change or not the copyright notices in the source code files. > > To resolve the issue the Apache way, I propose a consensus approval > vote. We can collate the result next Wednesday September 28. > > [ ] Option 1: All source code files will only have the following > copyright statement. > CCCC-YYYY are the years found on each file
[example snipped] > > [ ] Option 2: All source code files will keep the existing copyright > notices. I don't think this vote is clear, there is no example for option 2 so it's hard to tell exactly what we are voting for. It seems like you are saying the existing IBM notices for licence and copyright should remain. I don't think anyone has proposed that. I have been saying that the single IBM copyright statement should remain in the form that IBM wrote, since it is defining a copyright owned by IBM. Thus my example would be /* * * (C) Copyright IBM Corp. CCCC, YYYY. * Copyright 2004 The Apache Software Foundation. * * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software * distributed under the License is distributed on an ""AS IS"" BASIS, * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and * limitations under the License. * */ Maybe the exact form doesn't matter, maybe it does? Can someone re-format an existing copyright notice to their own style? Dan.
pgpvCfB1STL8r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
