+1 w/r/t copyright - single year policy is tried and tested in the pubs world, stands up to legal challenges. Note, however, that in some disputes the earlier date wins.
> On Jan 20, 2016, at 7:02 PM, Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Niall Pemberton > <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Firstly, great job on producing the first RC. From an ASF release PoV, the >> main concerns for me would be gemfire-joptsimple and the binary distro >> NOTICE file and those stop me giving a +1 vote. From a user PoV the >> dependencies in the maven pom look painful, trying to determine which can >> safely be excluded. >> >> 1. Source Distribution >> * I checked the LICENSE, NOTICE & DISCLAIMER files were present >> * The LICENSE file looks good >> * The Copyright in the NOTICE file should be updated to "2015-2016" > > As this is the first release, my suggestion would be to just have it > be 2016. In general, you should really only have one copyright year > (the most recent one) - see what httpd does: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/NOTICE > > I'm not sure why the docs on > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html differ from what httpd > does - a topic for legal-discuss@, I guess. I'd just follow what > httpd does and move on with life. > > Cheers. -- justin
