I have a suggestion which I hope you take in the spirit of constructive 
criticism. Anything you might see and wish to share with this project on a 
release which is an observation for the future should be shared in a separate 
thread with an altered subject.

FWIW the collective work’s copyright is 2018 and that is what matters.

Best Regards,

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 2:41 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>> No, because the point was to copy something published in 2017. 
> OK I won't raise a PR but you or another committer still may want to fix this 
> at some point.
> IMO You are publishing it (by voting on the contents of the release and 
> putting it up n the mirrors) now and  that's happening in 2018 so that would 
> make the content copyright 2018. If you look at the date he code was 
> committed to the repo that was also 2018. If you copy a work and modify it 
> then the year of copyright of that new work is the year of it's public 
> publication not when it was created or the year of publication of the 
> previous work. IANAL but this seems to explain it clearly. [1]
>> LICENSE nitpicking should be done on the commits. 
> I am not a committer on this project, while I watch the commits and help 
> where I can but I'd suggest it’s the other committers and PMC members on this 
> project who have that responsibility. Also this has nothing to do with the 
> LICENSE file.
>> But you still have to understand context before creating FUD.
> I calling FUD on your FUD :-) As I’ve said several times now this has no 
> impact on the release. I'm sorry but I have not idea why you are trying to 
> make this an issue when it could be simply and easily fixed and has no impact 
> on the current release vote, which you noticed has passed. Again this was 
> just something I noticed up as part of of my normal release process of 
> checking a release of which I've done 100s of times now.
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 1. https://www.copyrightlaws.com/copyright-notice-year/

Reply via email to