From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10435 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2012 06:23:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 10420 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2012 06:23:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 06:23:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846762BB0D2 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 01:23:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id PeMevVZcd7G7 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 01:23:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B15D2BB0AB for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 01:23:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 89998145615; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 10:23:10 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 06:23:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: one more question about year ranges in copyright notices... Message-ID: <20120106062310.GH2730@adacore.com> References: <20120104094649.GV2730@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120104094649.GV2730@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 Hello again, Thanks a lot to all of you who answered. Very helpful. As usual when it comes to legal matters, I did not have a clear understanding of the all the ramifications. I have therefore sent the question to the FSF copyright clerk email address. One small clarification: The proposed change will simply shrink the copyright years into a single range, but it will not change the initial year recorded in each file. If that initial year is mistaken (in either direction), fixing that would need to be done on an individual basis after review. Now, wait and see... -- Joel