This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Ada Copyright Notice Nit
- From: Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:22:50 +0200
- Subject: Re: Ada Copyright Notice Nit
- References: <4AD8777A.8070503@oarcorp.com> <mcroco7a0gs.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com>
> > 9drpc.adb:-- Copyright (C) 1992-2009, Free Software
> > Foundation, Inc. --
> > a-assert.adb:-- Copyright (C) 2007-2009 Free Software
> > Foundation, Inc. --
> >
> > Are both of these OK? Should they be changed
> > to be the same?
> >
> > I doubt it makes any legal difference but we
> > are normally picky on formatting in these areas.
>
> We normally follow the GNU standard for copyright notices, which is
> here:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Notices.html
>
> It says no comma. It also says do not use a dash between years, but
> instead list all the years individually. See the main gcc directory
> for a myriad examples.
>
> My understanding is that none of this makes any legal difference. I
> think it's more or less up to the Ada maintainers whether they want to
> strictly adhere to the GNU standards or not.
The short answer is that we prefer the current state of things (use of dashes),
and use of a comma after the date, so in the above, 9drpc.adb is "correct"
and a-assert.adb isn't.
Arno