On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0000, Al wrote: > This isn't in response to any single email in the thread, just putting my two > cents in :) > > It isn't quite accurate to say that year of creation/publication is never > relevant. The year is relevant whenever copyright assignment is done. After, > all, if a corporation (or possibly a non-profit) owns a copyright, it is not > expected there will ever be a "death date" to add 75 years to. > > Instead, afaik (for USA at least -- and I suppose many jurisdictions follow > suit), corporate copyright expires either 95 years after publication or 120 > years after creation, whichever comes soonest. > > In general, for individual contributions, I agree it is pointless to specify > a year. However, it's not always black-and-white. > > Then again, I believe all suckless development is entirely done with Git > these days. So surely the datetime information recorded in each commit makes > the question moot? > > If for no other reason, I would vote for dropping the year simply because > it's inelegant to manually track information that Git already records for us > automatically.
Theres no voting or democracy and it is not your decision to make. > > .:AL:. > -- Kind regards, Hiltjo
