Re: GPLv3/L8R - How should the copyright notice look?

>>>>> Robin Paterson<scot_paro(a)yahoo.co.uk> writes: Robin> There are two distinct things here; the copyright notice, and Robin> the software licence. Of course. Thanks for clarifying this. I was a bit vague on the naming there. Robin> There is no need to provide a copyright notice, as copyright is Robin> protected automatically Most, all(?), files in XEmacs does have a copyright notice. What I was trying to say was that these will be kept intact, no change of year for the copyright.

Robin> (yes, it's more complicated than this). If you do provide a Robin> copyright notice then you only need to change the date if the Robin> content has substantially changed. (substantially changed - how Robin> much is "substantial"?) That is what I'm saying - Changing the license is not a substantial change. No change of year in the copyright notice.

Robin> Software licence. You want to include a copy of the licence Robin> with the distribution - a link is not sufficient. A link is Robin> nice in addition to the distro copy, but isn't enough on its Robin> own. A copy is the license is of course included in the XEmacs distribution. What I'm suggesting is that when we switch to GPLv3 or later license we should adopt the same wording as in Emacs. Previous versions said that if you didn't receive a version of the GPL you should write to the FSF supplying the full address. Now it says "see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>." which is much shorter and will possibly not change.