| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression |
| Date: | 2025-03-21 12:34:02 |
| Message-ID: | 202503211234.7mgpzuujp2eo@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-Mar-21, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 8:37 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Should the copyright be only 2025 in this case:
> The patch was posted in 2024 to this mailing list. So we better
> protect the copyright since then. I remember a hackers discussion
> where a senior member of the community mentioned that there's not harm
> in mentioning longer copyright periods than being stricter about it. I
> couldn't find the discussion though.
On the other hand, my impression is that we do update copyright years to
current year, when committing new files of patches that have been around
for long.
And there's always
https://liferay.dev/blogs/-/blogs/how-and-why-to-properly-write-copyright-statements-in-your-code
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Las cosas son buenas o malas segun las hace nuestra opinión" (Lisias)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2025-03-21 12:39:30 | Re: making EXPLAIN extensible |
| Previous Message | torikoshia | 2025-03-21 12:29:58 | Re: Change log level for notifying hot standby is waiting non-overflowed snapshot |