From: "Adam Heath" <[email protected]>
: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: svn commit: r948846 - in /ofbiz/trunk: applications/accounting/entitydef/ applications/accounting/webapp/accounting/WEB-INF/ applications/accounting/webapp/ap/WEB-INF/ applications/accounting/webapp/ar/WEB-INF/ applications/commonext/documents/ applica...


[email protected] wrote:
Author: jleroux
Date: Thu May 27 14:23:22 2010
New Revision: 948846

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=948846&view=rev
Log:
We don't need

<copyright>Copyright 2001-.* The Apache Software Foundation</copyright>
<copyright><year>.*</year><holder>Apache Foundation</holder></copyright>
<copyright><year>.*</year><holder>Apache Foundation.</holder></copyright>
<owner>Copyright 2001-.* The Apache Software Foundation</owner>

Less to update every year!

Thanks to BJ 1st effort at "update files from 2009 to 2010" 
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3783) - OFBIZ-3783

Note: there are been a lot of efforts in 2009: there are plenty of data dated 
from this year!

I hope I did not broke anything (should not, but of course I did not try all 
changes...) Anyway, this can be easily reverted...

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=948846&r1=948845&r2=948846&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- ofbiz/trunk/applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Thu May 27 
14:23:22 2010
@@ -25,8 +25,7 @@ under the License.
     <!-- ========================================================= -->
     <title>Entity of an Open For Business Project Component</title>
     <description>None</description>
-    <copyright>Copyright 2001-2009 The Apache Software Foundation</copyright>
-    <author>None</author>
+        <author>None</author>
     <version>1.0</version>


There are lots of cases of bad formatting introduced with this change.

Yes, I saw that too and fixed them at r948852

Jacques

Reply via email to