AFAIK, xml, html, properties, xsd and jelly files were not licensed. Hence, they have not been migrated.I notice that all files now say copyright 2004. Shouldn't most of them say copyright 2003-2004? Do we need to worry about this?
I think we do. We also need to add the license to every file that can contain a comment. Specifically we need to add the short license header to all xml, html, properties, xsd, and jelly files.
However, if you really want to have the short license header, I should be able to fix that.
Concerning the "2004" instead of the "2003 - 2004" copyright, the license header used by applications/jmxdebugging committed by Geir - who is aware of this kind of concern - has been used as a template.
I agree that this module has been contributed in 2004 and hence that there is no way to apply a "2003 - 2004" copyright. Nevertheless, does it means that all files committed in 2004 should only have a "2004" copyright and the ones committed in 2003 should have a "2003 - 2004" copyright ?
If yes, one will need to query CVS to have the exact date of commit and apply the right copyright.
Cheers, Gianny
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger http://g.msn.fr/FR1001/866 : dialoguez en son et en images avec vos amis
