From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9318 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2002 23:07:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9308 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2002 23:07:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Apr 2002 23:07:06 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 170sKZ-00085o-00 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 19:07:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:07:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Correct machine name in config/m68k/tm-nbsd.h Message-ID: <20020425190715.A31091@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <4.2.0.58.20020425123916.016f4370@ics.u-strasbg.fr> <20020424102300.B6310@nevyn.them.org> <4.2.0.58.20020425123916.016f4370@ics.u-strasbg.fr> <3.0.6.32.20020426002406.01062100@ics.u-strasbg.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20020426002406.01062100@ics.u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00450.txt.bz2 On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 12:24:06AM +0200, muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr wrote: > At 21:18 25/04/02 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 12:42:42 +0200 > >> From: Pierre Muller > >> > > >> >FYI, the guidelines for such decisions are in standards.texi (IIRC). > >> Sorry, but I went trough (quickly) > >> but didn't find anything about > >> years for copyrights. > > > >Sorry, my memory betrayed me: the guidelines I had in mind are in > >maintain.texi, not in standards.texi. (You can download maintain.texi > >from the GNU FTP site, if you don't have it.) Look for a node > >"Copyright Notices" in that manual. > > Extracted from this file: > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > The list of year numbers should include each year in which you finished > preparing a version which was actually released, and which was an > ancestor of the current version. > > Please reread the paragraph above, slowly and carefully. It is > important to understand that rule precisely, much as you would > understand a complicated C statement in order to hand-simulate it. > > This list is _not_ a list of years in which versions were _released_. > It is a list of years in which versions, later released, were > _completed_. So if you finish a version on Dec 31, 1994 and release it > on Jan 1, 1995, this version requires the inclusion of 1994, but > doesn't require the inclusion of 1995. > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > > After rereading, I understand that we should only add a year number > each time we release a version we should update the copyright > notice with the year corresponding to the last commit before > the release.... > > Shouldn't this be done automatically by some script?? > Anyhow, as I understand this, I will not add 2002 to the year list, > as it might well be that we only release GDB 6.0 next year, > so if we add some other change in early 2003, that 2002 > should not be in the list according to that rule! > > But maybe I didn't reread it slowly enough.... I believe that "made available in a public CVS" counts as "released" for these purposes. That's how projects seem to manage it, at least. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer