You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by Dominique Devienne <DD...@lgc.com> on 2004/01/07 15:55:14 UTC
Code Copyright
Hi Stefan,
I'm looking at your Happy New Year commit, and wonder about the rational
behind not listing years the source was not changed;
- * Copyright (c) 2000-2001,2003 The Apache Software Foundation. All
rights
+ * Copyright (c) 2000-2001,2003-2004 The Apache Software Foundation. All
rights
Even though there was no modification of a particular file, that doesn't
mean the file is not copyrighted. And Such a scheme will eventually grow
to yield valid long and ugly looking lines for the copyright years.
Why not simply use (inception year)-(last modification year), 2000-2004
in this particular case?
Happy New Year to you too ;-) --DD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Code Copyright
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@iseran.com>.
Conor MacNeill wrote:
>>Conor, are you still using the Taligent guide as your reference
>>programming guide :)
>>
>>At least upgrade to its successor, that IBM Java framework, whatever its
>>name was.
>>
>
>
> What about Pink? No I don't use the book day to day :-).
I was thinking about the San Francisco framework.
I have a collection of old UI design guidelines going back years that I
am fond of, I have
-IBM CUA
-HP NewWave
-Sun OpenSomethingOrOther
-PenPoint
-Win95
-Motif
+ a couple of others I forget. Its good to see the design stuff of the
defunct ones, as there is often good stuff in there you can package up
and present as your own ideas. For example, Suns NeWS windowing model is
now redone in XML and called Longhorn Avalon :)
> I did remember it
> had
> a little styleguide in it. You do realize that parts of the JDK classes
> were written by Taligent (Check out source of Gregorian Calendar).
>
that does not surprise me. Axis has little problem right now that it
doesnt successfully parse xsd:time objects when the machine running the
unit tests is in GMT TZ (i.e. mine), but it works in the US, in
different time zones...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
RE: Code Copyright
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
>
> Conor, are you still using the Taligent guide as your reference
> programming guide :)
>
> At least upgrade to its successor, that IBM Java framework, whatever its
> name was.
>
What about Pink? No I don't use the book day to day :-). I did remember it
had
a little styleguide in it. You do realize that parts of the JDK classes
were written by Taligent (Check out source of Gregorian Calendar).
Conor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Code Copyright
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@iseran.com>.
Conor MacNeill wrote:
> This is from my "Taligent Guide to Designing Programs"
Conor, are you still using the Taligent guide as your reference
programming guide :)
At least upgrade to its successor, that IBM Java framework, whatever its
name was.
-steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
RE: Code Copyright
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, 8 January 2004 2:31 AM
> To: dev@ant.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Code Copyright
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Dominique Devienne <DD...@lgc.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm looking at your Happy New Year commit, and wonder about the
> > rational behind not listing years the source was not changed;
>
> I don't understand American Copyright law even remotely well enough to
> actually tell you 8-)
>
> I've been taught (by Australians, mind you), to write the Copyright
> lines exactly that way. Include the years it has changed and don't
> list the years that didn't see any changes.
>
This is from my "Taligent Guide to Designing Programs"
"If you significantly modify a file, list the year of modification.
The years correspond to publication, not creation dates. Separate
consecutive years with a dash, but off-years with a comma"
This was published in 1994, for C++ programs. How much of the above
is required and how much is merely convention, I'm not sure. Regardless,
the dates not listed do not imply there is no copyright asserted for
those years.
Conor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Code Copyright
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Dominique Devienne <DD...@lgc.com> wrote:
> I'm looking at your Happy New Year commit, and wonder about the
> rational behind not listing years the source was not changed;
I don't understand American Copyright law even remotely well enough to
actually tell you 8-)
I've been taught (by Australians, mind you), to write the Copyright
lines exactly that way. Include the years it has changed and don't
list the years that didn't see any changes.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org