From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28078 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2012 06:58:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 28068 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jan 2012 06:58:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 06:58:01 +0000 Received: from ams by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RhyJs-0004Cy-B8; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 01:58:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 06:58:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) To: Eli Zaretskii CC: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Tue, 03 Jan 2012 01:29:12 -0500) Subject: Re: RFA: Using year ranges in copyright notices... Reply-to: ams@gnu.org References: <20120103042431.GI2730@adacore.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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/msg00080.txt.bz2 > A bit of a trivial question, but I wanted to be sure it's OK to do so. > I would like us to use address ranges in our copyright headers, instead > of explicitly listing each and every year. This needs to be cleared with lawyers @gnu.org. At least at some point, Richard explicitly asked _not_ to use ranges, due to some legal issues, and I don't think I saw that restriction lifted since then. At the very least, we should ask Richard about that. It is documented in (maintain) Copyright Notices: | You can use a range (`2008-2010') instead of listing individual | years (`2008, 2009, 2010') if and only if: 1) every year in the range, | inclusive, really is a "copyrightable" year that would be listed | individually; _and_ 2) you make an explicit statement in a `README' | file about this usage.