Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?
Дата
Msg-id 20120629001405.GA19998@momjian.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Ответы Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-docs
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 that the Copyright year on the backbranches is always out-of-date - for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@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

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

В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Comment on max_locks_per_transaction
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: outdated legal notice in SGML docs?