File headers [was Re: ICLA needed?]

[Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>]

Hi,

> When Samsung got the NuttX files they put an Apache license header
> over the BSD header, now the original BSD Header will disappear from
> NuttX project files.

Correct we’ll replace, where needed, the original BSD header with an ASF one. Note that the ASF has a different header for it’s projects. [1]

> So, could we just remove the original BSD header
> from Samsung modified files and just keep their Apache license into
> those file?

I don’t recommend we do that as they may of made changes or the files may of changed since they copied them. They probably also used teh 3rd party header not the ASF one.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html

Re: File headers [was Re: ICLA needed?]

[Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>]

Hi,

> The BSD license (except for the BSD 4-clause) is friendly towards the ALv2 one

Correct and even then I’ve deal with that in the past in Mynewt.

> I suppose that the worst case is that we keep that contributed code under the BSD license, and make necessary references, like in NOTICE?

They get added to LICENSE not NOTICE. [1]

Given the large number of file I was think of asking Infra for a VM and set up fossology on it [2] to help with this process.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
2. https://www.fossology.org

Re: File headers [was Re: ICLA needed?]

[Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>]

The BSD license (except for the BSD 4-clause) is friendly towards the ALv2 one:

https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b <https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>

I suppose that the worst case is that we keep that contributed code under the BSD license, and make necessary references, like in NOTICE?

-Flavio

> On 15 Dec 2019, at 22:18, Gregory Nutt <sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> So, could we just remove the original BSD header
>>> from Samsung modified files and just keep their Apache license into
>>> those file?
>> I don’t recommend we do that as they may of made changes or the files may of changed since they copied them. They probably also used teh 3rd party header not the ASF one.
> 
> No Samsung files could be brought in until they are made to conform to the NuttX coding standard (Yes, Samsung changed the coding standard too).  If they are reconverted to the NuttX standard, it should be pretty easy to see any differences.
> 
> I think we are talking about a doomsday scenario here.  We need to get creative only if there is a snag.  Let's assume that there will be no snag (but also be prepared with Plan B).
> 
> Greg
> 
> 

Re: File headers [was Re: ICLA needed?]

[Gregory Nutt <sp...@gmail.com>]

>> So, could we just remove the original BSD header
>> from Samsung modified files and just keep their Apache license into
>> those file?
> I don’t recommend we do that as they may of made changes or the files may of changed since they copied them. They probably also used teh 3rd party header not the ASF one.

No Samsung files could be brought in until they are made to conform to 
the NuttX coding standard (Yes, Samsung changed the coding standard 
too).  If they are reconverted to the NuttX standard, it should be 
pretty easy to see any differences.

I think we are talking about a doomsday scenario here.  We need to get 
creative only if there is a snag.  Let's assume that there will be no 
snag (but also be prepared with Plan B).

Greg