Dear Nicholas, On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 04:51:24PM -0700, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 07:45:18AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > > I found some more errors in the copyright file. Rather than go back and > > forth once again, I fixed them in our team git repository. I set the > > changelog back to UNRELEASED: if you are okay with the changes, please > > `dch -r`, commit and push, and I will upload. > > Why did you remove 2001 from Eric Marsen's cgi.el copyright entry when > the file is time stamped <2001-08-24 emarsden>? Ah, sorry. > For httpd.el, I agree that "2001, 2003" is more accurate, but is it > allowed? In the past, when I've submitted patches to this effect the > maintainer of the package changed the lines to something like > "2001-2003", even though the VCS and copyright embedded in the file > specified discreet years rather than a range...which led me to believe > that a discreet range is unacceptable. A discrete range is fine. > Ah! Yes, this is the spec that addresses my question to #3. That > said, in the past some of my other work on d/copyright has been said > to be "worse than useless" even though it adhered to the spec, and > even though it seemed to reflect what I saw reading the packages > COPYING file, in addition to spending a while reading VCS commits for > stuff I wasn't sure about. This has led me to wonder about the tribal > rules that are not in the spec... Could you give me an example of a rule like that? > Would you please check to see if my latest commit to d/copyright is > ok? It's what makes the most sense to me. As far as I can tell, it > might be problematic because it infers that Eric Marsden changed > cgi.el in 2003. If it's problematic I'll revert it, then dch -r. No, it doesn't actually imply that Marsden changed that file in 2004 (the spec does explain this!). Go ahead and `dch -r`! -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature