You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucy.apache.org by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> on 2011/12/01 01:25:04 UTC
[lucy-dev] Only required notices in NOTICE
Greets,
I have committed the changes described in this email as repository revisions
r1208864 and r1208868. If no one objects within the next couple of days, I
claim lazy consensus.
Marvin Humphrey
-----------------------
Even former ASF attorney and current ASF board member Larry Rosen isn't clear
on what goes in NOTICE:
http://s.apache.org/MBM
FWIW, I have never understood the distinction between the NOTICE file and
the LICENSE file. I guess I assumed that someone else here did and that
ASF had already explained it precisely somewhere. Based on this
multi-year-long thread on JIRA, I now assume I'm not the only one
confused.
Is there a link somewhere that explains what goes in NOTICE and what goes
in LICENSE?
The documentation was recently updated after a long debate on
general@incubator revealed the state of confusion:
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
Based on the more minimalist requirements for NOTICE which have emerged from
the clarifications, we can remove a few entries from ours.
First, we can move the public domain information about the Lemon Parser
Generator and the US Constitution sample text out of NOTICE and into LICENSE.
This product bundles the text of the Constitution of the United States of
America, which is in the public domain.
This product bundles the Lemon parser generator from the SQLite project, which
has been released into the public domain by its authors as explained at
<http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html>.
Second, we can remove the Snowball copyright information, because the
inclusion of the Snowball's copyright notice and 3-clause BSD license in
LICENSE suffices.
This software bundles code developed by the Snowball project at
<http://snowball.tartarus.org>, Copyright (c) 2001, Dr Martin Porter and
Copyright (c) 2002, Richard Boulton.
Lastly, there is the notice for the modified Unicode Data files in utf8proc,
and perhaps soon in our own generated files:
This product bundles derivatives of Unicode Data files subject to the
following notice: Copyright (c) 1991-2007 Unicode, Inc. All rights reserved.
Distributed under the Terms of Use in http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html.
I originally believed that this notice was required in order to satisfy the
"associated documentation" part of the Unicode license:
(b) both the above copyright notice(s) and this permission notice appear in
associated documentation,
However, I no longer believe that it makes sense to include that snippet in
NOTICE.
* If Lucy has no "associated documentation" (because the bundled docs are
part of the software), we're fine.
* If LICENSE is considered "associated documentation", we're fine.
* If LICENSE is *not* part of the "associated documentation" but NOTICE
*is*, then we have to include the full Unicode license in NOTICE as well
as LICENSE. That's silly.
My position is that that our inclusion of the complete Unicode license in
LICENSE suffices.
What we are left with in NOTICE after all that is the ASF notice, which is
unambiguously required per ASF policy:
Apache Lucy
Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).