5 ms·

I have done one letter typo fixes to doc repos as a 3rd party and felt great about them. One of them was actually a typo in a command line that I found by goin

by cbanek 6y ago

I have done one letter typo fixes to doc repos as a 3rd party and felt great about them. One of them was actually a typo in a command line that I found by going through their instructions step by step copying and pasting each line. I was seriously confused when it didn't work!

dannyw 6y ago
Yes. Fixing up documentation is always helpful, even if it’s a one letter change! Now, updating “copyright 2018-2019” to “2020” isn’t.
- rjmunro 6y ago
  The point of the date it to tell people when the material was created. In some jurisdictions / situations, copyright expires N years after it was created, so that date tells people when copyright has expired. Unfortunately, in many cases now, copyright is based on the year the author died, rather than the year the work was created, which means it is much harder to work out if something has entered the public domain. Changing the date without changing the code significantly is arguably fraudulent.
  - noja 6y ago
    > Changing the date without changing the code significantly is arguably fraudulent. In some countries the publishing date is what counts, and they define publishing for websites as when the site was viewed.
    - Zarel 6y ago
      Presumably, even if publishing date is relevant, it's only first publication that's relevant. No work should stay copyrighted forever just because it's constantly being republished.
      - noja 6y ago
        > it's only first publication that's relevant. No, the publishing date is relevant (not the first publishing date).
  - schwartzworld 6y ago
    doesn't moving the creation date forward in time make you vulnerable? if you create some content in 2018 and I rip it off in 2019 and then you update your copyright to 2020, what's to stop me from saying I came up with it first?
    - 0xFluegel 6y ago
      I want to like that idea. Unfortunately, I can counter with: When you (as an outsider) see two very similar projects, one claiming to be from 2018 the other from 2020, what will you look into/try out first?
      - schwartzworld 6y ago
        Depends on the selling point. A 2 year old library sounds to me like it's just getting mature.
      - ric2b 6y ago
        Obviously the one from 2018. It should still be quite modern but with big issues already ironed out.
    - rjmunro 6y ago
      That's partly why you have a span like "Copyright 2018-2020" - you are saying some of this material is older, some isn't. You need to keep copies of the older version with the older copyright to be clear which parts were invented when.
- user5994461 6y ago
  It's useful in showing the project is maintained and how old it is. I regularly have to shop around for libraries. Seeing a copyright 2017 doesn't bode well for the documentation or the project being maintained.

by cbanek 6y ago

dannyw 6y ago

rjmunro 6y ago
The point of the date it to tell people when the material was created. In some jurisdictions / situations, copyright expires N years after it was created, so that date tells people when copyright has expired. Unfortunately, in many cases now, copyright is based on the year the author died, rather than the year the work was created, which means it is much harder to work out if something has entered the public domain. Changing the date without changing the code significantly is arguably fraudulent.
- noja 6y ago
  > Changing the date without changing the code significantly is arguably fraudulent. In some countries the publishing date is what counts, and they define publishing for websites as when the site was viewed.
  - Zarel 6y ago
    Presumably, even if publishing date is relevant, it's only first publication that's relevant. No work should stay copyrighted forever just because it's constantly being republished.
    - noja 6y ago
      > it's only first publication that's relevant. No, the publishing date is relevant (not the first publishing date).
- schwartzworld 6y ago
  doesn't moving the creation date forward in time make you vulnerable? if you create some content in 2018 and I rip it off in 2019 and then you update your copyright to 2020, what's to stop me from saying I came up with it first?
  - 0xFluegel 6y ago
    I want to like that idea. Unfortunately, I can counter with: When you (as an outsider) see two very similar projects, one claiming to be from 2018 the other from 2020, what will you look into/try out first?
    - schwartzworld 6y ago
      Depends on the selling point. A 2 year old library sounds to me like it's just getting mature.
    - ric2b 6y ago
      Obviously the one from 2018. It should still be quite modern but with big issues already ironed out.
  - rjmunro 6y ago
    That's partly why you have a span like "Copyright 2018-2020" - you are saying some of this material is older, some isn't. You need to keep copies of the older version with the older copyright to be clear which parts were invented when.
user5994461 6y ago
It's useful in showing the project is maintained and how old it is. I regularly have to shop around for libraries. Seeing a copyright 2017 doesn't bode well for the documentation or the project being maintained.