Re: bad copyright years

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, Glenn Morris <address@hidden> writes:

> Kenichi Handa wrote:
> > I've just updated all AIST copyright years.

> It seems as if in every case, you just added every year from the first
> copyright date to the present. This is not exactly how it is supposed
> to work. The idea is, you should add every year where the file was
> released with a non-trivial amount of changes in either the file
> itself or the "package" (ie Emacs in this case).

> Since 2001, Emacs has been publicly available by anon CVS. This
> counts as a "release" every year. So any file that was in Emacs 21 (in
> 2001) should have the years 2001-2006 inclusive added. Files added to
> CVS since Emacs 21 should have the years N-2006 added, where N is the
> year of addition.

> Before 2001, you just need to add the dates of the Emacs releases
> (assuming the files were in Emacs at the time). I suspect that few
> files have actually had this done in a rigorous fashion. So if I were
> you, I probably would just have added the years 2001-2006.

The files who have copyright year before 1997 were released
every year as part of Mule package.  They are integrated
into Emacs in 1997.  And Emacs were released in 1997, 1998,
and 1999.  So, perhaps I didn't have to add the year 2000,
but I thought that having that year was not harmful.  And
actually most files are modified in 2000 too.

---
Kenichi Handa
address@hidden