update copyright note

[nbehrnd]

Explain the problem.

When running

pandoc  --version

on either Window's cmd.exe, or powershell, the copyright notice describes the interval 2006-2024 instead of the expected 2006-2025.

Pandoc version?

Pandoc.exe 3.7.0.2 as provided by the installer pandoc-3.7.0.2-windows-x86_64.msi for Windows distributed by the release page since May, and used in Windows 10.

[alerque]

This has come up before, e.g. #10512. My take from there:

My take would be to get of this treadmill altogether. It is not necessary to display the current year in order for the copyright to be valid, only when it was established is enough.

https://matija.suklje.name/how-and-why-to-properly-write-copyright-statements-in-your-code#why-not-bump-the-year-on-change

I still suggest the end part of the range be removed and just note the copyright starts with the project start. Nobody is going to be confused about Pandoc being stale because the copyright is just 2006.

[nbehrnd]

@alerque I think I once read either this, or a different publication to conclude the year of initial publication of a software is sufficient in the present context, some time (some winters?) ago. And I agree, a (c) 2006 alone were fine here.

[tarleb]

As pandoc uses the GPL, we should probably follow the GPL howto, which suggests to include all years in which a release was made.

[jgm]

For now I have updated this to 2006-2025, since "-2024" gives the wrong impression that work on the project has stopped. But I still have no idea what to think about the bigger question from #10512, still unresolved.

I note that emacs --version just says "Copyright (C) 2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc."!

lua -v says "Lua 5.2.4 Copyright (C) 1994-2015 Lua.org, PUC-Rio"

screen (which is a GNU project) just says "Screen version 4.00.03 (FAU) 23-Oct-06"

GNU awk says "Copyright (C) 1989, 1991-2025 Free Software Foundation"

ImageMagick says "Copyright: (C) 1999 ImageMagick Studio LLC"

latex --version says "Copyright 2024 Han The Thanh (pdfTeX) et al."
lualatex --version "LuaTeX is Copyright 2022 Taco Hoekwater and the LuaTeX Team."
xelatex --version "Copyright 2024 SIL International, Jonathan Kew and Khaled Hosny."

rg --version gives no copyright info.

So, some give the full range, some give nothing, some give the first year, some give the last year...

I wonder if it is really necessary to put copyright information in the version output.

[jgm]

I'll close this issue so we can focus on #10512

[nbehrnd]

A note like pandoc 3.7.0.2 after running pandoc -v equally were acceptable for me. If necessary, the corresponding date can be found elsewhere (time stamp on the release page, the pdf documentation; the change log, the tag in the commit history, etc.). To me, it were better than a copyright note 2006-2024 though the release used was released in 2025.

I speculate if a line like Copyright 2006-2025 is appreciated as useful to retain (maturity of the project @tarleb mentions), or deemed necessary, a GitHub action with write privileges to the repository (or to prepare a PR for subsequent manual review and admission) active once each January 1st at 00:00 UTC could address this issue ("to automate the boring stuff" as Al Sweigart might describe it).

Edit: updated to include @tarleb's comment

[tarleb]

What I gather from reading a few articles on the topic is that, legally speaking, the exact details of copyright notices really don't matter much. I like the current range because it's a nice way to state that pandoc is mature software that's under active development. I'd be a bit sad to see that statement being removed.