[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r22853 - in trunk: build/win32 packages/windows-innosetup subversion/bindings/swig/python subversion/libsvn_subr www

From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev_at_farside.org.uk>
Date: 2007-01-02 21:16:55 CET

On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 08:43:31PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> I know we've talked about this in the past (perhaps you weren't here
> for those conversations, Malcolm), but changing copyright years when
> the file or project hasn't substantively changed is a bad idea.

I'm pretty sure I remember those conversations, and you're right that
lying about copyright dates isn't good - which is why I was careful to
only adjust those dates that refer to the collective work as a whole,
rather than on all individual files. IANAL, but I don't think there's
anything wrong in that.

> Plus,
> technically, it's only supposed to be the year of first publication
> not the most recent one.
>

Well, you're right that at the moment there isn't much to distinguish
our tree at the end of 2006 from the current one, but I'm sure we'll
commit _something_ that's legally significant from a copyright
perspective at some point fairly soon. At which point, as I understand
it, the collection becomes a derivative work of something with a
copyright date of 2007, so the whole lot gets to have that date.

The alternatives, I guess, is to either bump the dates immediately
before a release (though I don't see that publication via release is any
different to publication via ViewVC), or to decide at what point during
the year we've committed something legally significant.

> Can we please get the SVN Corp Board to deal with this definitively?
>

Sure, it'd be good to get definitive advice if we can.

Regards,
Malcolm

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Jan 2 21:17:12 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.