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 that the Copyright year on the backbranches is always out-of-date - for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(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-06-29 02:12:24|
|Subject: Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2012-06-22 03:03:31|
|Subject: Re: Comment on max_locks_per_transaction|