Branko Čibej wrote: > I just fixed that and proposed the backports ... and IMO NOTICE is an > even stronger reason not to release as-is. Surely we should apply the > same standards to our releases as that we regularly brainwash podlings > about.
We should apply the same standards, yes. Is this issue a release-blocking violation of those standards? No, I don't think it is. I have voted +1 to backport the updates, but I stand by my +1 votes to release as is. The copyright year statement is a whole number approximation to a fuzzy quantity; as such it is inevitably subject to being inaccurate whenever any work is prepared for release near the beginning of a year. It would be better to say 2015 in this case, but not unconditionally wrong to say 2014. - Julian
