On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Werner Almesberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> xiangfu wrote: > > /* Smedia Glamo 336x/337x driver > > * > > - - * (C) 2007 by OpenMoko, Inc. > > + * (C) 2008 by OpenMoko, Inc. > > * Author: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > In cases where there is actual content that's been copied (and not just > the copyright notice itself), I would suggest to update copyright > notices by adding the new years or by using a range, e.g., > > * (C) 2007, 2008 by OpenMoko, Inc. > > * (C) 2007-2008 by OpenMoko, Inc. > > or even > > * (C) 2007, 2009-2010 by OpenMoko, Inc. > > (in case nobody worked on that file in 2008.) > > - Werner > > Also how about the change from GPLv2 to GPLv3? Is all the code going to be GPLv3 now? The license already says "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version." which lets people use the code in a GPLv3 application. Changing the license to require a minimum of GPLv3 would (in my opinion, I am NOT a lawyer) prevent someone from using some of this code in a GPLv2 application... Is this change to GPLv3 intentional? Not that I am for or against any specific version of the GPL but this seems like a subtle way of changing the licensing terms in a patch whose description is "just change the Copyright year from 2007 to 2008.". Maybe I missed another thread discussing this..? .02$ antoine -- Antoine Reid
