You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr> on 2009/08/02 18:55:27 UTC
Re: [math] 2.0 RC1 available for review
Phil Steitz a écrit :
> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>
>>> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>>
>>>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think the following addition to LICENSE.txt is appropriate:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the
>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>> code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This would be appropriate if we were shipping sources from
>>>>>>>> differently
>>>>>>>> licensed components. What we have done - I think (IANAL) - is
>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>> *derivative works* from the original sources. Someone can
>>>>>>>> correct me
>>>>>>>> if I am wrong, but I don't see how that means that we now have
>>>>>>>> "subcomponents" with separate license terms. Can someone explain
>>>>>>>> this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Phil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suggest the following change:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- LICENSE.txt (revision 798724)
>>>>>>> +++ LICENSE.txt (working copy)
>>>>>>> @@ -203,12 +203,12 @@
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -APACHE COMMONS MATH SUBCOMPONENTS:
>>>>>>> +APACHE COMMONS MATH DERIVATIVE WORKS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> -separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the
>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>> -code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>> -conditions of the following licenses.
>>>>>>> +The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>> +whose implementation is derived from orgininal sources written
>>>>>>> +in C or Fortran. License terms of the original sources
>>>>>>> +are reproduced below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is much better than my simple copy from the example.
>>>>>> I'll check it in in a few minutes, thanks for the fix
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Luc
>>>>>>
>>>>> Got on piece of feedback from legal-discuss, which is to make explicit
>>>>> which classes in [math] depend on which of the original sources. That
>>>>> should be added to LICENSE.txt either at the top or in the section for
>>>>> each original source.
>>>>>
>>>> This is already the case. In fact, in addition to the attributions
>>>> formerly in the NOTICE file and now in the LICENSE file,
>>>>
>>> What was suggested was that in LICENSE and NOTICE files themselves, we
>>> should specify which commons-math files depend on which original
>>> sources. Currently, the original sources are just listed, with no
>>> reference to the classes that are derived (in part) from them.
>>>
>>
>> OK. I've added it.
>>
>> Luc
>>
>>
> Thanks!
Are we ready for another RC ?
Luc
>
> Phil
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [math] 2.0 RC1 available for review
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>
>> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>
>>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think the following addition to LICENSE.txt is appropriate:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the
>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>> code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This would be appropriate if we were shipping sources from
>>>>>>>>> differently
>>>>>>>>> licensed components. What we have done - I think (IANAL) - is
>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>> *derivative works* from the original sources. Someone can
>>>>>>>>> correct me
>>>>>>>>> if I am wrong, but I don't see how that means that we now have
>>>>>>>>> "subcomponents" with separate license terms. Can someone explain
>>>>>>>>> this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Phil
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suggest the following change:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --- LICENSE.txt (revision 798724)
>>>>>>>> +++ LICENSE.txt (working copy)
>>>>>>>> @@ -203,12 +203,12 @@
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -APACHE COMMONS MATH SUBCOMPONENTS:
>>>>>>>> +APACHE COMMONS MATH DERIVATIVE WORKS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> -separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the
>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>> -code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>> -conditions of the following licenses.
>>>>>>>> +The Apache commons-math library includes a number of subcomponents
>>>>>>>> +whose implementation is derived from orgininal sources written
>>>>>>>> +in C or Fortran. License terms of the original sources
>>>>>>>> +are reproduced below.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is much better than my simple copy from the example.
>>>>>>> I'll check it in in a few minutes, thanks for the fix
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Luc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Got on piece of feedback from legal-discuss, which is to make explicit
>>>>>> which classes in [math] depend on which of the original sources. That
>>>>>> should be added to LICENSE.txt either at the top or in the section for
>>>>>> each original source.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> This is already the case. In fact, in addition to the attributions
>>>>> formerly in the NOTICE file and now in the LICENSE file,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> What was suggested was that in LICENSE and NOTICE files themselves, we
>>>> should specify which commons-math files depend on which original
>>>> sources. Currently, the original sources are just listed, with no
>>>> reference to the classes that are derived (in part) from them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> OK. I've added it.
>>>
>>> Luc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
> Are we ready for another RC ?
>
Yes. Testing now...
Phil
> Luc
>
>
>> Phil
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org