On Thu, 04 Feb 2021 08:54:33 +0100 Sven Eckelmann wrote: > On Thursday, 4 February 2021 01:35:06 CET Jakub Kicinski wrote: > [...] > > Is this how copyright works? I'm not a layer, but I thought it was > > supposed to reflect changes done to given file in a given year. > > <irony>Because we all know that the first thing a person is doing when > submitting a change is to update the copyright year.</irony> > > So we have either the option to: > > * not update it at all (as in many kernel sources) > * don't have it listed explicitly (as seen in other kernel sources) > * update it once a year > > I personally like to have a simple solution so I don't have to deal with this > kind of details while doing interesting things. The current "solution" > was to handle the copyright notices year for the whole project as one entity > - > once per year and then ignore it for the rest of the year.
Back when I was working for a vendor I had a script which used git to find files touched in current year and then a bit of sed to update the dates. Instead of running your current script every Jan, you can run that one every Dec. > And I would also prefer not to start a discussion about the differences > between the inalienable German Urheberrecht, pre 1989 anglo-american > copyright, post 1989 anglo american copyright and other copyright like laws. No need, we can depend on common sense. I hope you understand that a pull request which updates 8 lines of code, mostly comments, and then contains a version bump + 57 lines of copyright bumps is very likely to give people a pause, right? If you strongly prefer the current model please add appropriate commit messages justifying it and repost. Right now patch 1 and 2 have none.
