On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0000, Al wrote:
> This isn't in response to any single email in the thread, just putting my two cents in :)
>
> It isn't quite accurate to say that year of creation/publication is never relevant. The year is relevant whenever copyright assignment is done. After, all, if a corporation (or possibly a non-profit) owns a copyright, it is not expected there will ever be a "death date" to add 75 years to.
>
> Instead, afaik (for USA at least -- and I suppose many jurisdictions follow suit), corporate copyright expires either 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation, whichever comes soonest.
>
> In general, for individual contributions, I agree it is pointless to specify a year. However, it's not always black-and-white.
>
> Then again, I believe all suckless development is entirely done with Git these days. So surely the datetime information recorded in each commit makes the question moot?
>
> If for no other reason, I would vote for dropping the year simply because it's inelegant to manually track information that Git already records for us automatically.
Theres no voting or democracy and it is not your decision to make.
>
> .:AL:.
>
--
Kind regards,
Hiltjo
Received on Thu Feb 09 2023 - 01:43:22 CET