Hey, Simon is on the PMC, so he should know. Just joking. Back to
business: There is a recent thread on legal-discuss that should shed
some light into this:

Looks like I was taking this a little too strict earlier. And it turns
out that the copyright year thing will likely soon be a thing of the
past anyway. HTH

On 14.01.2006 01:52:31 Manuel Mall wrote:
> > It is quite equivocal for me. On the one hand it speaks about new
> > significant content, which would mean: leave out 2005. On the other
> > it speaks about a range of years due to the public accessibility
> > (meaning continuous publication?), which would mean: 1999-2006.
> >
> Simon,
> good point and I don't know the answer. My interpretation was to leave 
> the 2005 out but I can see that leaving it in can be sensibly argued as 
> well. 
> But that's what we have our PMC for don't we?
> PMC please tell us committers how these ASF rules should be interpreted 
> in the XMLGRAPHICS  project.

Jeremias Maerki

Reply via email to