geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: Niggle about ASL 2.0 license notice text
Date Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:04:45 GMT
On Feb 25, 2004, at 4:48 PM, gianny DAMOUR wrote:

> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>> I notice that all files now say copyright 2004.  Shouldn't most of 
>>> them say copyright 2003-2004?  Do we need to worry about this?
>> I think we do.  We also need to add the license to every file that 
>> can contain a comment.   Specifically we need to add the short 
>> license header to all xml, html, properties, xsd, and jelly files.
> AFAIK, xml, html, properties, xsd and jelly files were not licensed. 
> Hence, they have not been migrated.

This was covered in an email to from Greg Stein:

* In conjunction with the the discussion about relicensing and some
   copyright issues, the Board is establishing an official policy in this

   - each and every file must have exactly *one* Copyright line, 
     The Apache Software Foundation. additional individual or corporate
     copyrights are not allowed.

     (of course, binary files or certain restrictively formatted files
     cannot include the copyright and license, but the copyright/license
     header should be in everything possible)

> However, if you really want to have the short license header, I should 
> be able to fix that.
> Concerning the "2004" instead of the "2003 - 2004" copyright, the 
> license header used by applications/jmxdebugging committed by Geir - 
> who is aware of this kind of concern - has been used as a template.
> I agree that this module has been contributed in 2004 and hence that 
> there is no way to apply a "2003 - 2004" copyright. Nevertheless, does 
> it means that all files committed in 2004 should only have a "2004" 
> copyright and the ones committed in 2003 should have a "2003 - 2004" 
> copyright ?
> If yes, one will need to query CVS to have the exact date of commit 
> and apply the right copyright.

I don't know about that one specifically.  The range copyright notice 
is particularly annoying because it means we need to do a batch update 
every year to increment the year.


View raw message