Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:14:05 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?
Message-ID: <20120629001405.GA19998@momjian.us>
References: <4FB56426.7050409@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<1340140601.26286.28.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1340140601.26286.28.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:16:41AM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > This seems to be wrong in all branches and has the additional problem
> > that the Copyright year on the backbranches is always out-of-date - for
> > example:
> > 
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/LEGALNOTICE.html
> > 
> > will have 2009 for 8.4.11 which was released in 2012...
> > 
> > any thoughts on what the correct way to fix this is?
> 
> I've fixed this in all the active back branches.  The copyright tool in
> src/tools/ does inform about doing these changes, but whoever does them
> has apparently not read that.

I didn't think we wanted to update back branch copyright end dates
because that would effect thing like psql \copyright display, and the
risk didn't seem worth it.

Do we want back-branches updated in the future?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +