Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371A91FFFD21
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Tue,  3 Jul 2012 13:02:33 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bruce@momjian.us>) id 1Sm5YZ-0006uy-30
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:02:32 +0000
Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bruce@momjian.us>)
	id 1Sm5YJ-0007wI-ND; Tue, 03 Jul 2012 12:02:11 -0400
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 12:02:11 -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Subject: Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?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: <20120703160211.GE5578@momjian.us>
References: <4FB56426.7050409@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<1340140601.26286.28.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
	<20120629001405.GA19998@momjian.us>
	<1341089578.18033.7.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1341089578.18033.7.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Archive-Number: 201207/5
X-Sequence-Number: 7379


--PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:52:58PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tor, 2012-06-28 at 20:14 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 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 that the Copyright year on the backbranches is always out-of-date - for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?
> 
> I think we should update at least COPYRIGHT and doc/src/sgml/legal.sgml,
> which are the most user-facing files.  Updating all the source files is
> probably not necessary.

OK, I updated the copyright tool to mention this for back branches.

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

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

--PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="copyright.diff"

diff --git a/src/tools/copyright.pl b/src/tools/copyright.pl
new file mode 100755
index d78a8d8..b8b8761
*** a/src/tools/copyright.pl
--- b/src/tools/copyright.pl
*************** sub wanted {
*** 51,55 ****
      untie @lines;
  }
  
! print "Manually update doc/src/sgml/legal.sgml and src/interfaces/libpq/libpq.rc.in too\n";
  
--- 51,56 ----
      untie @lines;
  }
  
! print "Manually update doc/src/sgml/legal.sgml and src/interfaces/libpq/libpq.rc.in too.\n";
! print "Also update ./COPYRIGHT and doc/src/sgml/legal.sgml in all back branches.\n";
  

--PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr--