[ was: Re: [PATCH] Add do-release.sh ]

On 12-08-19 17:18, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 29-07-19 19:20, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 09:41:33AM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> this commit adds a script that:
>>> - bumps either the minor or the major version, using options
>>>   --major or --minor
>>> - updates VERSION
>>> - commits VERSION update
>>> - tags VERSION update
>>>
>>> OK for trunk?
>>>
>>> Is there anything else involved in doing a release?
>>
>> I think that is all, bumping VERSION, commiting and tagging was all I did in
>> the past.
>>
>> One thing that might be worth doing is bump copyright years on files you've
>> modified, I know dwz.c has been using mostly Red Hat copyright, if you want
>> to use say FSF copyright, can you change that 2003 in there to 2003, 2019?
>> Or do you want to use SUSE copyright instead?
>> I guess because I have touched dwz.c last year the RH copyright should be
>> -2018 instead of -2015 too, and dwarf2.def should be probably changed to
>> 1992-2018 FSF copyright, using the simple range.  After the release we
>> should likely import new dwarf2.def and dwarf2.h from GCC tree.
> 
> Hmm, something I overlooked:
> ...
> $ ./dwz --version
> dwz version 0.13
> Copyright (C) 2001-2012 Red Hat, Inc.
> Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> ...
> 
> We've updated the copyright in the file headers, but not in the version
> message.
> 
> Patch below fixes this, updating the message using the copyright from
> the dwz.c file header.
> 
> I wonder though, what about the copyright in the other files:
> dwarf2.def, dwarf2.h, dwarfnames.c, hashtab.c, hashtab.h, sha1.c and
> sha1.h? Should we take the copyright in those files into account as
> well? Or is it just dwz.c that matters?

I've written a script that:
- extracts copyright lines from the source files,
- merges them, and
- writes out define flags to a new file COPYRIGHT_YEARS.

The version message now uses those defines.

Thanks,
- Tom