lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC: stop doing "grand replace" updates to copyright years


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: RFC: stop doing "grand replace" updates to copyright years
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 21:16:27 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:

> To summarizes, it changes `LICENSE` like this:
>
> ```
> @@ -1,3 +1,14 @@
> +GNU LilyPond is Copyright (C) 1996-2023 by the LilyPond authors, as
> defined below.
> +
> +LilyPond's Git repository is the authoritative source for copyright
> +attribution of each piece of code. It can be found at
> +
> +  https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/lilypond.git
> +
> +or
> +
> +  https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond
> +
>  GNU LilyPond is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
>  it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>  the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
> ```
>
> and copyright headers like this:
>
> ```
> @@ -1,10 +1,13 @@
>  ;;;; This file is part of LilyPond, the GNU music typesetter.
>  ;;;;
> -;;;; Copyright (C) 2012--2023 David Nalesnik <david.nalesnik@gmail.com>
> -;;;;                          Thomas Morley <thomasmorley65@gmail.com>
> -;;;;                          Dan Eble <nine.fierce.ballads@gmail.com>
> -;;;;                          Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de>
> -;;;;                          Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr>
> +;;;; Please read the file LICENSE for copyright information.
> +;;;;
> +;;;; This file was mainly authored by:
> +;;;;   David Nalesnik <david.nalesnik@gmail.com>
> +;;;;   Thomas Morley <thomasmorley65@gmail.com>
> +;;;;   Dan Eble <nine.fierce.ballads@gmail.com>
> +;;;;   Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de>
> +;;;;   Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr>
>  ;;;;
>  ;;;; LilyPond is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
>  ;;;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> ```
>
> Thoughts?

"Mainly authored" relies on which metric?  How are mechanical
reformattings not generally affecting the copyright situation catered
for?  How is a generational update expounding on the original idea but
not leaving original code in place catered for?

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]