GeezerVison

The following commit authors need to sign the Contributor License Agreement:

• [email protected]

Click the button to sign:

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

And if you don't make the requested changes, you will be put in the comfy chair!

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

One way or another, we should ensure that the copyright years are updated before the next release, which will likely be a 3.13 alpha in a few days.

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

I've updated this PR to remove the year changes to third-party copyrights, and to add 2024 to the PSF's copyright in LICENSE.

CLA: @0xSalikh please could you click the button at #113608 (comment) to sign the CLA?

Even if they don't sign the CLA, I think this is trivial enough to merge without it (but it would be easier if it was).

Updated to use 2001-2024 year range in LICENSE as suggested in #101706: 9d2f2dd

IMNSHO We should stop doing this.

Trusted Non-PSF legal advice I've received in the past has been that nobody should bother to change dates in a Copyright (C) statement.

Unless the PSF's current legal council specifically advises us to do this, lets stop updating these dates in the future. (If they agree that we should not, I'd also ask them if we could get rid of the confusing "-XXXX" through style date at the same time to avoid people wrongly thinking they're out of date and re-proposing the same change in the future)

IMNSHO We should stop doing this.

Trusted Non-PSF legal advice I've received in the past has been that nobody should bother to change dates in a Copyright (C) statement.

Unless the PSF's current legal council specifically advises us to do this, lets stop updating these dates in the future. (If they agree that we should not, I'd also ask them if we could get rid of the confusing "-XXXX" through style date at the same time to avoid people wrongly thinking they're out of date and re-proposing the same change in the future)

@gpshead I agree ++. Updating these dates is mostly harmless, and eventually useless busywork with neither legal nor value. I am talking from experience, as I have some software legal and license compliance chops.