You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> on 2006/06/03 03:28:45 UTC
New copyright header policy
During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
released on or after August 1, 2006.
Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
Thanks,
Cliff
--- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
within third-party works.
2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
third-party source files.
3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
source for convenience.
4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
a. remove such notices, or
b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
project release, or
c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
or relocation of the notices.
2. Each source file should include the following license header --
note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
distributed with this work for additional information
regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
"License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
software distributed under the License is distributed on an
"AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
specific language governing permissions and limitations
under the License.
C. NOTICE FILE
0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 4, 2006, at 6:45 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > On 6/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > WHEREAS, the Foundation has observed that per-file
> > attribution
> > of authorship does not promote collaborative development,
> >
> > That's why it's good to read every word in such a document ( and
> > probably why
> > there are so many word - to make it hard to find the important
> > stuff ).
> >
> > Are we back to removal of @author ?
<snip/>
> about this. Just wanted to make sure this 'legal' stuff is not
> reopening this issue
> or forcing a change in current practice ( where each project can
> chose to use
> or not the author lines )
The WHEREAS parts of a resolution are there to provide background
relevant to the actions taken (the RESOLVED parts). The WHEREAS
clause you quoted is simply there to provide background for why the
new policy isn't having each contributor place a copyright line above
their contribution.
The policy I sent out to start this thread is all you need to worry
about; it covers every action taken by the resolution. And, no one
was trying to bury an important requirement in the many words of the
resolution.
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Costin Manolache <co...@apache.org>.
On 6/4/06, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > On 6/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > WHEREAS, the Foundation has observed that per-file
> > attribution
> > of authorship does not promote collaborative development,
> >
> > That's why it's good to read every word in such a document ( and
> > probably why
> > there are so many word - to make it hard to find the important
> > stuff ).
> >
> > Are we back to removal of @author ?
>
> No, it has nothing to do with that. We are removing the ASF copyright
> line and nothing else. That doesn't change the fact that author lines
> are dumb.
Ok, sorry for misunderstanding it, it was late and all the legal things tend
to
be confusing.
I don't want to argue if author lines are dumb or not - enough past flame
wars
about this. Just wanted to make sure this 'legal' stuff is not reopening
this issue
or forcing a change in current practice ( where each project can chose to
use
or not the author lines )
Costin
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 5, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>>> We are removing the ASF copyright line and nothing else.
>>> And moving it to the NOTICE file, AIUI. Along with other copyright
>>> notices as applicable.
>
>> No. We are moving the ASF copyright notice. If someone or some
>> entity
>> wants us to move their own copyright line as well, then they can
>> ask us
>> to do so (or do it themselves if they have commit access).
>
> I meant that our goal is to have the copyright notices in the
> NOTICES file,
> not that we would move them without permission.
>
>> Leave [embedded copyright] as is, or add our license header above the
>> copyright line and remove the header below the copyright line,
>> leaving
>> the copyright line as is.
>
> So are we going to end up with a lot of files with:
>
> Copyright 2005 Every
> Copyright 2005 Tom
> Copyright 2006 Dick
> Copyright 2006 and
> Copyright 2007 Harry
> Copyright 2007 and their brothers
>
> with everyone EXCEPT for the ASF sticking their two cents in there?
> Copyright becomes the new @author tag?
>
> Is a copyright entry acceptable only for an initial contribution,
> and not
> thereafter? Or what? And, yes, I understand that PMCs can make
> decisions,
> but we really ought to have a policy to prevent things turning into
> copywrong.
Let me know if the policy I've written isn't clear about this, but
here's what it says -- and this part comes straight from the board
resolution:
> B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> a. remove such notices, or
> b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project release, or
> c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> or relocation of the notices.
There is no option for someone to leave the copyright notice where it
is for works submitted directly to the ASF.
Here are a few of the scenarios; tell me if the policy isn't clear
about this:
1. Don't move copyright notices for third-party works, including old
stuff and future stuff.
2. All ASF copyright notices will be removed from source files of
releases after July 31st, replaced with the ASF notice in the NOTICE
file.
3. We should not be accepting source files including a copyright
notice of the committer/contributor into a project. We should reject
the contribution if one of the three options in section B.1 cannot be
taken.
4. If we find source files that are part of the code developed at
Apache (not third-party files) with copyright notices for some other
entity other than the ASF, leave it as is; or if you want, ask the
copyright owner to take one of the options above. I don't think we
need to remove the existing file, and we shouldn't remove their
copyright notice.
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 5, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Is a copyright entry acceptable only for an initial contribution,
> and not
> thereafter? Or what? And, yes, I understand that PMCs can make
> decisions,
> but we really ought to have a policy to prevent things turning into
> copywrong.
A PMC must vote to accept the contribution. The PMC can choose not to
accept the contribution based on anything it doesn't like. If we make
a special rule based on all of the possible anti-social behaviors
that might lead to chaos, then our PMCs are never going to learn how
to govern themselves. We only need ASF-wide rules for the things that
are required of the ASF as a whole.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
RE: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > We are removing the ASF copyright line and nothing else.
> > And moving it to the NOTICE file, AIUI. Along with other copyright
> > notices as applicable.
> No. We are moving the ASF copyright notice. If someone or some entity
> wants us to move their own copyright line as well, then they can ask us
> to do so (or do it themselves if they have commit access).
I meant that our goal is to have the copyright notices in the NOTICES file,
not that we would move them without permission.
> Leave [embedded copyright] as is, or add our license header above the
> copyright line and remove the header below the copyright line, leaving
> the copyright line as is.
So are we going to end up with a lot of files with:
Copyright 2005 Every
Copyright 2005 Tom
Copyright 2006 Dick
Copyright 2006 and
Copyright 2007 Harry
Copyright 2007 and their brothers
with everyone EXCEPT for the ASF sticking their two cents in there?
Copyright becomes the new @author tag?
Is a copyright entry acceptable only for an initial contribution, and not
thereafter? Or what? And, yes, I understand that PMCs can make decisions,
but we really ought to have a policy to prevent things turning into
copywrong.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 4, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> We are removing the ASF copyright line and nothing else.
>
> And moving it to the NOTICE file, AIUI. Along with other copyright
> notices
> as applicable.
No. We are moving the ASF copyright notice. If someone or some entity
wants us to move their own copyright line as well, then they can ask us
to do so (or do it themselves if they have commit access).
> Separately, If we can no longer reach the person who posted a file
> with:
>
> * Copyright [2005] <some author>
>
> * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> * You may obtain a copy of the License at:
> *
> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> what are our options?
Leave it as is, or add our license header above the copyright line and
remove the header below the copyright line, leaving the copyright line
as is.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 5, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Stephen McConnell ((DPML)) wrote:
> In addition to the above I would like to know the ASF position
> concerning
> potentially new contributions to the ASF associated to known and
> reachable
> contributors via existing copyright assertions who are unwilling to
> acquiesce to the removal of copyright statements from existing
> documents.
The law does not allow us to remove or alter the copyright notice
without the copyright owner's consent. When new contributions are
made, the responsible PMC decides whether the contribution is in a
form that they deem acceptable, and either accepts it or rejects it.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
RE: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Stephen McConnell (DPML)" <mc...@apache.org>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> Sent: Monday, 5 June 2006 9:56 AM
> To: Legal Discuss
> Subject: RE: New copyright header policy
>
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > We are removing the ASF copyright line and nothing else.
>
> And moving it to the NOTICE file, AIUI. Along with other
> copyright notices as applicable.
>
> Separately, If we can no longer reach the person who posted a
> file with:
>
> * Copyright [2005] <some author>
>
> * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> * You may obtain a copy of the License at:
> *
> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> what are our options?
In addition to the above I would like to know the ASF position concerning
potentially new contributions to the ASF associated to known and reachable
contributors via existing copyright assertions who are unwilling to
acquiesce to the removal of copyright statements from existing documents.
Cheers, Steve.
--------------------------
Stephen McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@dpml.net
http://www.dpml.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
RE: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> We are removing the ASF copyright line and nothing else.
And moving it to the NOTICE file, AIUI. Along with other copyright notices
as applicable.
Separately, If we can no longer reach the person who posted a file with:
* Copyright [2005] <some author>
* Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
* you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
* You may obtain a copy of the License at:
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
what are our options?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 3, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> On 6/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> WHEREAS, the Foundation has observed that per-file
> attribution
> of authorship does not promote collaborative development,
>
> That's why it's good to read every word in such a document ( and
> probably why
> there are so many word - to make it hard to find the important
> stuff ).
>
> Are we back to removal of @author ?
No, it has nothing to do with that. We are removing the ASF copyright
line and nothing else. That doesn't change the fact that author lines
are dumb.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Costin Manolache <co...@gmail.com>.
On 6/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
WHEREAS, the Foundation has observed that per-file attribution
> of authorship does not promote collaborative development,
That's why it's good to read every word in such a document ( and probably
why
there are so many word - to make it hard to find the important stuff ).
Are we back to removal of @author ?
Is there an option for existing work and contributions ( before this new
thing is adopted ) to either opt
out or request removal of someone's past contributions ? Also, is it
possible for someone to
opt out in future contributions, or the only choice is to stop contributing
to ASF ?
I think it is very unfair to accept contributions from someone under some
rules, and
then change the rules.
Maybe the foundation has observed that author attribution does not promote
collaborative
development - which a lot of people would argue is a bad observation - but I
would
say lack of author attribution - and removal of existing author attribution
- is considered
by some people as unethical ( to say the least ), and such action may result
in even less development.
My point is - even if this is legal, it doesn't mean it's right. Archives
probably have all the arguments
pro and against author attribution, and even if the board or a majority of
people want it remove
it still doesn't make it right or ethical (IMHO).
( sorry if I missintepreted this - but it's an issue I feel strongly about
and it was sneaked in in the past,
which makes it even worse )
Costin
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 3, 2006, at 6:08 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> I am not arguing against this change, but speaking as someone who did
> the 1.1 to 2.0 licence change for Tomcat 4 I know this will deflect
> effort from other tasks and re-iterate my recommendation that the
> announcement of this requirement is accompanied by an explanation of
> why it needs to be done, and not just "because the board says so".
Hi Mark,
I see your point; I will add some explanation when I send it out to
committers@.
The short version is: since contributors maintain their copyright
ownership in the works they submit, it is misleading to place the ASF
copyright at the top of each source file. The ASF notice represented
the copyright ownership in the collective work of the entire
distribution, but placing it at the top of each source file was
causing a lot of confusion.
The actual resolution passed by the board includes a little
explanation for the issues that needed to be addressed in the WHEREAS
paragraphs. Here's an unofficial copy (official minutes aren't out
just yet):
WHEREAS, the copyright of contributions to The Apache
Software Foundation remains with the contribution's owner(s),
but the copyright of the collective work in each Foundation
release is owned by the Foundation,
WHEREAS, each file within a Foundation release often includes
contributions from multiple copyright owners,
WHEREAS, the Foundation has observed that per-file attribution
of authorship does not promote collaborative development,
WHEREAS, inclusion of works that have not been directly
submitted by the copyright owners to the Foundation for
development does not present the same collaborative
development issues and does not allow the owners to consider
the Foundation's copyright notice policies;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the case of copyright
notices in files contributed and licensed to The Apache
Software Foundation, the copyright owner (or owner's agent)
must either: remove such notices, move them to the NOTICE
file associated with each applicable project release, or
provide written permission for the Foundation to make such
removal or relocation of the notices, and be it further
RESOLVED, that each release shall include a NOTICE file for
such copyright notices and other notices required to accompany
the distribution, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the NOTICE file shall begin with the following
text, suitably modified to reflect the product name
and year(s) of distribution of the current and past releases:
Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
and be it further
RESOLVED, that files licensed to The Apache Software
Foundation shall be labeled with the following notice:
Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
distributed with this work for additional information
regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
"License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
software distributed under the License is distributed on an
"AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
specific language governing permissions and limitations
under the License.
and be it further
RESOLVED, that for the case of works that have not been
directly submitted by the copyright owners to the Foundation
for development, the associated copyright notices for the work
shall not be moved, removed, or modified.
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Mark Thomas wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > There's a set of scripts (Perl, Python, and Java) under the committers
> > directory that does all of the relicensing for you. It's really 5
> > minutes worth of work, if that... -- justin
>
> For the record, it looks like only the Perl one has been updated.
I wrote those original ones under relicense/src/perl and
recently updated them. I did this to assist myself with
Forrest and Cocoon. If it helps other people then great.
The Python and Java ones have not been updated.
Also Roy recently added a new script in tools/copy2license.pl
> Running the tool might only take five minutes, if that, but checking
> the tool has done what it should do will take longer. Whilst I am
> grateful for that the tools exist since they do all the mindless work
> for you I would always want to review the output, particularly for
> something as important as the license.
Absolutely. In fact the tools that i wrote have a
"practice mode" and a "verbose mode" to enable reviewing
of what it is going to do. They can also avoid specified files.
I find it very useful to scan the project's trunk and summarise
the license header situation.
I do many practice runs. It is not an easy job.
Even so, when doing a change like this, then i always
do 'svn diff | my-sed-script' to filter stuff that i
expect. If anything is left over, then there is trouble.
Note: If someone has already used update-AL20.pl
then do it again. There was a vital error.
-David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> There's a set of scripts (Perl, Python, and Java) under the committers
> directory that does all of the relicensing for you. It's really 5
> minutes worth of work, if that... -- justin
For the record, it looks like only the Perl one has been updated.
Running the tool might only take five minutes, if that, but checking
the tool has done what it should do will take longer. Whilst I am
grateful for that the tools exist since they do all the mindless work
for you I would always want to review the output, particularly for
something as important as the license.
Between them, the various Tomcat versions likely to have releases
after 1st August have well over 3,500 java files. Even a cursory scan
of the commit log is going to take rather more than 5 minutes and that
is without taking account of the various anomalous files I am sure
will crop up that will require some manual tweaking.
I am not arguing against this change, but speaking as someone who did
the 1.1 to 2.0 licence change for Tomcat 4 I know this will deflect
effort from other tasks and re-iterate my recommendation that the
announcement of this requirement is accompanied by an explanation of
why it needs to be done, and not just "because the board says so".
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 6/3/06, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> If it is the case then it would be worth adding an explanation of why
> we need to make these changes as otherwise it looks like the board is
> mandating projects expend what could be significant effort for no
> appreciable benefit.
There's a set of scripts (Perl, Python, and Java) under the committers
directory that does all of the relicensing for you. It's really 5
minutes worth of work, if that... -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
<snip/>
> Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending it
> here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the new
> policy; hit me with any questions you have.
<snip/>
> B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF by
> the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in
> it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> a. remove such notices, or
> b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project release, or
> c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
> relocation of the notices.
> 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
My understanding of B.2 is that we are going to have to replace the
source header on every single source file we distribute. Is this
interpretation correct?
If it is the case then it would be worth adding an explanation of why
we need to make these changes as otherwise it looks like the board is
mandating projects expend what could be significant effort for no
appreciable benefit.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
BTW the discussion is taking place on legal-discuss@apache.org
-dain
On Aug 6, 2006, at 5:21 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> The current deadline for the new policy is for releases distributed
> after Sept 1. See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html.
> Some people are questioning that deadline. However, I'd guess that
> 1.1.1 will be our last release under existing policy...
>
> --kevan
>
> On Aug 5, 2006, at 11:19 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> Reading some more mails on the maven list, this change has
>> apparently been postponed.... but we should no doubt watch out for
>> it.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2006, at 8:13 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> I've seen discussion about this new policy on several other
>>> apache lists but AFAICT I did not receive any direct notice of
>>> the new policy and AFAICT our source files do not yet have the
>>> new header. Did any other committers get notice of this? Don't
>>> we have to fix the source for 1.1.1 before releasing it?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From: Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>
>>>> Date: July 31, 2006 11:51:25 PM PDT
>>>> To: dev@maven.apache.org
>>>> Subject: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright
>>>> header policy)
>>>> Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <de...@maven.apache.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting
>>>> with today a PMC isn't allowed to release an artifact if the
>>>> sources don't cover the new copyright header policy (second
>>>> mail). Additionally we need to add LICENSE and NOTICE files
>>>> inside jars too (first mail).
>>>>
>>>> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement
>>>> or is there some simple way to achieve the same result?
>>>>
>>>> Reinhard
>>>>
>>>> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>>>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>>>>>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them
>>>>>> need to
>>>>>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>>>>> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
>>>>> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>>>>
>>>> - o -
>>>>
>>>> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to
>>>> require
>>>> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements
>>>> for
>>>> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes
>>>> to past
>>>> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
>>>> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
>>>> >
>>>> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by
>>>> sending
>>>> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So,
>>>> here's the
>>>> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Cliff
>>>> >
>>>> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>>>> >
>>>> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
>>>> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
>>>> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>>>> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
>>>> > within third-party works.
>>>> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top
>>>> of any
>>>> > third-party source files.
>>>> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
>>>> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest
>>>> of the
>>>> > source for convenience.
>>>> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be
>>>> dealt
>>>> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>>>> >
>>>> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
>>>> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to
>>>> the ASF
>>>> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>>>> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
>>>> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must
>>>> either:
>>>> > a. remove such notices, or
>>>> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each
>>>> applicable
>>>> > project release, or
>>>> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such
>>>> removal
>>>> > or relocation of the notices.
>>>> > 2. Each source file should include the following license
>>>> header --
>>>> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>>>> >
>>>> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF)
>>>> under one
>>>> > or more contributor license agreements. See the
>>>> NOTICE file
>>>> > distributed with this work for additional information
>>>> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses
>>>> this file
>>>> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>>>> > "License"); you may not use this file except in
>>>> compliance
>>>> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the
>>>> License at
>>>> >
>>>> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>> >
>>>> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in
>>>> writing,
>>>> > software distributed under the License is
>>>> distributed on an
>>>> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF
>>>> ANY
>>>> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License
>>>> for the
>>>> > specific language governing permissions and
>>>> limitations
>>>> > under the License.
>>>> >
>>>> > C. NOTICE FILE
>>>> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file
>>>> in the
>>>> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
>>>> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following
>>>> text,
>>>> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
>>>> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>>>> >
>>>> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
>>>> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>>>> >
>>>> > This product includes software developed at
>>>> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://
>>>> www.apache.org/).
>>>> >
>>>> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
>>>> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
>>>> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___________________________________________________________
>>>> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://
>>>> messenger.yahoo.de
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dave,
The current deadline for the new policy is for releases distributed
after Sept 1. See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html. Some
people are questioning that deadline. However, I'd guess that 1.1.1
will be our last release under existing policy...
--kevan
On Aug 5, 2006, at 11:19 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> Reading some more mails on the maven list, this change has
> apparently been postponed.... but we should no doubt watch out for it.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Aug 5, 2006, at 8:13 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I've seen discussion about this new policy on several other apache
>> lists but AFAICT I did not receive any direct notice of the new
>> policy and AFAICT our source files do not yet have the new
>> header. Did any other committers get notice of this? Don't we
>> have to fix the source for 1.1.1 before releasing it?
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>
>>> Date: July 31, 2006 11:51:25 PM PDT
>>> To: dev@maven.apache.org
>>> Subject: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright
>>> header policy)
>>> Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <de...@maven.apache.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with
>>> today a PMC isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources
>>> don't cover the new copyright header policy (second mail).
>>> Additionally we need to add LICENSE and NOTICE files inside jars
>>> too (first mail).
>>>
>>> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or
>>> is there some simple way to achieve the same result?
>>>
>>> Reinhard
>>>
>>> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>>>> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>>>>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
>>>>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>>>> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
>>>> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>>>
>>> - o -
>>>
>>> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to
>>> require
>>> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
>>> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes
>>> to past
>>> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
>>> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
>>> >
>>> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by
>>> sending
>>> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So,
>>> here's the
>>> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Cliff
>>> >
>>> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>>> >
>>> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
>>> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
>>> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>>> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
>>> > within third-party works.
>>> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top
>>> of any
>>> > third-party source files.
>>> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
>>> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest
>>> of the
>>> > source for convenience.
>>> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
>>> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>>> >
>>> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
>>> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to
>>> the ASF
>>> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>>> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
>>> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must
>>> either:
>>> > a. remove such notices, or
>>> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each
>>> applicable
>>> > project release, or
>>> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such
>>> removal
>>> > or relocation of the notices.
>>> > 2. Each source file should include the following license
>>> header --
>>> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>>> >
>>> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF)
>>> under one
>>> > or more contributor license agreements. See the
>>> NOTICE file
>>> > distributed with this work for additional information
>>> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses
>>> this file
>>> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>>> > "License"); you may not use this file except in
>>> compliance
>>> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the
>>> License at
>>> >
>>> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>> >
>>> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in
>>> writing,
>>> > software distributed under the License is
>>> distributed on an
>>> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
>>> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License
>>> for the
>>> > specific language governing permissions and
>>> limitations
>>> > under the License.
>>> >
>>> > C. NOTICE FILE
>>> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in
>>> the
>>> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
>>> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following
>>> text,
>>> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
>>> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>>> >
>>> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
>>> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>>> >
>>> > This product includes software developed at
>>> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://
>>> www.apache.org/).
>>> >
>>> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
>>> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
>>> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>>>
>>>
>>> ___________________________________________________________
>>> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://
>>> messenger.yahoo.de
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>
>
Re: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
Reading some more mails on the maven list, this change has apparently
been postponed.... but we should no doubt watch out for it.
thanks
david jencks
On Aug 5, 2006, at 8:13 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> I've seen discussion about this new policy on several other apache
> lists but AFAICT I did not receive any direct notice of the new
> policy and AFAICT our source files do not yet have the new header.
> Did any other committers get notice of this? Don't we have to fix
> the source for 1.1.1 before releasing it?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>
>> Date: July 31, 2006 11:51:25 PM PDT
>> To: dev@maven.apache.org
>> Subject: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright
>> header policy)
>> Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <de...@maven.apache.org>
>>
>>
>> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with
>> today a PMC isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources
>> don't cover the new copyright header policy (second mail).
>> Additionally we need to add LICENSE and NOTICE files inside jars
>> too (first mail).
>>
>> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or
>> is there some simple way to achieve the same result?
>>
>> Reinhard
>>
>> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>>>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
>>>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>>> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
>>> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>>
>> - o -
>>
>> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to
>> require
>> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
>> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to
>> past
>> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
>> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
>> >
>> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by
>> sending
>> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So,
>> here's the
>> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Cliff
>> >
>> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>> >
>> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
>> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
>> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
>> > within third-party works.
>> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top
>> of any
>> > third-party source files.
>> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
>> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of
>> the
>> > source for convenience.
>> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
>> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>> >
>> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
>> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to
>> the ASF
>> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
>> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
>> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
>> > a. remove such notices, or
>> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each
>> applicable
>> > project release, or
>> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such
>> removal
>> > or relocation of the notices.
>> > 2. Each source file should include the following license
>> header --
>> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>> >
>> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF)
>> under one
>> > or more contributor license agreements. See the
>> NOTICE file
>> > distributed with this work for additional information
>> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses
>> this file
>> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>> > "License"); you may not use this file except in
>> compliance
>> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the
>> License at
>> >
>> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>> >
>> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in
>> writing,
>> > software distributed under the License is
>> distributed on an
>> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
>> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License
>> for the
>> > specific language governing permissions and limitations
>> > under the License.
>> >
>> > C. NOTICE FILE
>> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
>> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
>> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following
>> text,
>> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
>> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>> >
>> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
>> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>> >
>> > This product includes software developed at
>> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>> >
>> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
>> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
>> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________________________________
>> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://
>> messenger.yahoo.de
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
Fwd: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
I've seen discussion about this new policy on several other apache
lists but AFAICT I did not receive any direct notice of the new
policy and AFAICT our source files do not yet have the new header.
Did any other committers get notice of this? Don't we have to fix
the source for 1.1.1 before releasing it?
thanks
david jencks
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>
> Date: July 31, 2006 11:51:25 PM PDT
> To: dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright
> header policy)
> Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <de...@maven.apache.org>
>
>
> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with
> today a PMC isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources
> don't cover the new copyright header policy (second mail).
> Additionally we need to add LICENSE and NOTICE files inside jars
> too (first mail).
>
> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or
> is there some simple way to achieve the same result?
>
> Reinhard
>
> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
>>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
>> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>
> - o -
>
> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to
> require
> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to
> past
> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
> >
> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by
> sending
> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's
> the
> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Cliff
> >
> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
> >
> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> > within third-party works.
> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of
> any
> > third-party source files.
> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> > source for convenience.
> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
> >
> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the
> ASF
> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> > a. remove such notices, or
> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> > project release, or
> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> > or relocation of the notices.
> > 2. Each source file should include the following license
> header --
> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
> >
> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF)
> under one
> > or more contributor license agreements. See the
> NOTICE file
> > distributed with this work for additional information
> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this
> file
> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > "License"); you may not use this file except in
> compliance
> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the
> License at
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> >
> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in
> writing,
> > software distributed under the License is distributed
> on an
> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License for
> the
> > specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > under the License.
> >
> > C. NOTICE FILE
> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
> >
> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > This product includes software developed at
> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> >
> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://
> messenger.yahoo.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
Re: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
You can very easily place the file in a location identified by
<resources>, but a better solution is still desired.
BTW, the change below has not been formally announced and delayed until
at least 1 Sept.
- Brett
On 1/08/2006 4:51 PM, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with today
> a PMC isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources don't cover
> the new copyright header policy (second mail). Additionally we need to
> add LICENSE and NOTICE files inside jars too (first mail).
>
> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or is
> there some simple way to achieve the same result?
>
> Reinhard
>
> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>>
>>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
>>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>>
>> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
>> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>
> - o -
>
> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
> >
> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Cliff
> >
> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
> >
> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> > within third-party works.
> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
> > third-party source files.
> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> > source for convenience.
> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
> >
> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> > a. remove such notices, or
> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> > project release, or
> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> > or relocation of the notices.
> > 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
> >
> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
> > or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > distributed with this work for additional information
> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> >
> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > under the License.
> >
> > C. NOTICE FILE
> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
> >
> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > This product includes software developed at
> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> >
> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ Telefonate
> ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Apache Maven - http://maven.apache.org/
Better Builds with Maven - http://library.mergere.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
AFAIK this requirement has been postponed.
On 8/1/06, Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with today a PMC
> isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources don't cover the new
> copyright header policy (second mail). Additionally we need to add LICENSE and
> NOTICE files inside jars too (first mail).
>
> Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or is there some
> simple way to achieve the same result?
>
> Reinhard
>
> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> > On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> >
> >> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
> >> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
> >> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
> >
> > Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
> > third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
>
> - o -
>
> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
> > a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> > copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
> > releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> > released on or after August 1, 2006.
> >
> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Cliff
> >
> > --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
> >
> > A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> > 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> > directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> > within third-party works.
> > 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
> > third-party source files.
> > 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> > should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> > source for convenience.
> > 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> > with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
> >
> > B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> > 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
> > by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> > 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> > included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> > a. remove such notices, or
> > b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> > project release, or
> > c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> > or relocation of the notices.
> > 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> > note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
> >
> > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
> > or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > distributed with this work for additional information
> > regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> >
> > Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > under the License.
> >
> > C. NOTICE FILE
> > 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> > top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> > 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> > suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> > distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
> >
> > Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> > Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > This product includes software developed at
> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> >
> > 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> > third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> > notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
LICENSE and NOTICE in jar artifacts (was: New copyright header policy)
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
According to the two mails below from legal@apache, starting with today a PMC
isn't allowed to release an artifact if the sources don't cover the new
copyright header policy (second mail). Additionally we need to add LICENSE and
NOTICE files inside jars too (first mail).
Has the maven-jar-plugin been adapted to meet this requirement or is there some
simple way to achieve the same result?
Reinhard
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>
>> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
>> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
>> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
>
> Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not
> third-party works, which should just be left as they were found)
- o -
On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
> a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
> releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> released on or after August 1, 2006.
>
> Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>
> Thanks,
> Cliff
>
> --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>
> A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> within third-party works.
> 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
> third-party source files.
> 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> source for convenience.
> 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>
> B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
> by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> a. remove such notices, or
> b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project release, or
> c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> or relocation of the notices.
> 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>
> Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
> or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> distributed with this work for additional information
> regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> specific language governing permissions and limitations
> under the License.
>
> C. NOTICE FILE
> 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>
> Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
> individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
> have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
Yes -- if they are the result of work created at the ASF (not third-
party works, which should just be left as they were found)
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
What would be the policy for jar files that can be distributed
individually through the Apache repository? do all of them need to
have the LICENSE and NOTICE files inside the jar?
On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
> a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
> releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> released on or after August 1, 2006.
>
> Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>
> Thanks,
> Cliff
>
> --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>
> A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> within third-party works.
> 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
> third-party source files.
> 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> source for convenience.
> 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>
> B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
> by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> a. remove such notices, or
> b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project release, or
> c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> or relocation of the notices.
> 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>
> Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
> or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> distributed with this work for additional information
> regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> specific language governing permissions and limitations
> under the License.
>
> C. NOTICE FILE
> 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>
> Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
I guess I should be clear about this when I send it out, but this
source file header policy only applies to the ASF. The appendix to
the license is still good guidance to others, it's just not what we
will now be doing.
Cliff
On 6/12/06, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> Sorry for being late, but maybe just something else which probably
> doesn't touch the policy directly:
>
> The ALv2 is not only used inside the ASF, but also by outside projects.
> In these case you often don't have a legal entity that the contributions
> are licensed to. Maybe that's bad but that's the way it often happens:
> People get together to develop some software. I wonder if there are any
> helpful guidelines in this area, especially in light of the new kind of
> file header.
>
> But don't let that question hold you up for the internal FAQ!
>
> On 13.06.2006 05:16:18 Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> > On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> > > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> > > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
> >
> > Seems like I've gotten all the questions I'm going to get for now on
> > this list. So, I'm going to take these questions and make a brief
> > FAQ and then send this out to committers@ later this week.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Sorry for being late, but maybe just something else which probably
doesn't touch the policy directly:
The ALv2 is not only used inside the ASF, but also by outside projects.
In these case you often don't have a legal entity that the contributions
are licensed to. Maybe that's bad but that's the way it often happens:
People get together to develop some software. I wonder if there are any
helpful guidelines in this area, especially in light of the new kind of
file header.
But don't let that question hold you up for the internal FAQ!
On 13.06.2006 05:16:18 Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> > it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> > new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>
> Seems like I've gotten all the questions I'm going to get for now on
> this list. So, I'm going to take these questions and make a brief
> FAQ and then send this out to committers@ later this week.
Thanks,
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On 6/2/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
Seems like I've gotten all the questions I'm going to get for now on
this list. So, I'm going to take these questions and make a brief
FAQ and then send this out to committers@ later this week.
Thanks,
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 6/7/06, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Is is sufficient just to change the headers on files in trunk and active
> branches or should we also do this to static trees such as tags? I would
> think doing tags would be confusing but individual files are available
> from those locations.
That's fine. We only care about active branches that releases are cut
from. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Jun 4, 2006, at 12:40 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, of course ...but why do we have to have that in each and every
>> file? What gets downloaded is a distribution - a whole package. Why
>> can't we define terms of distribution and copyright for the whole
>> distribution in one file?
>
>
> Because we also publish them as individual files (see subversion,
> viewcvs, websites, etc.).
>
Is is sufficient just to change the headers on files in trunk and active
branches or should we also do this to static trees such as tags? I would
think doing tags would be confusing but individual files are available
from those locations.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org>.
> The file doesn't "need" it in any sense of that word. The people who
> want to copy the file might need it, particularly if they receive it
> from a third-party who has copied it for use in a different product.
> Think of it as friendly documentation that says the recipient can use
> the file for other things, regardless of how it was received.
Ahhhh ...thanks for the clarification!
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 4, 2006, at 1:30 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> Because we also publish them as individual files (see subversion,
>> viewcvs, websites, etc.).
>
> So basically every file that is invididually accessible through
> subversion (which means pretty much all of them) needs to have such a
> header to be under ASL?
>
> The ASL is not GPL and people can pretty much do everything they
> want with it.
> So why this effort?
The file doesn't "need" it in any sense of that word. The people who
want to copy the file might need it, particularly if they receive it
from a third-party who has copied it for use in a different product.
Think of it as friendly documentation that says the recipient can use
the file for other things, regardless of how it was received.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org>.
> Because we also publish them as individual files (see subversion,
> viewcvs, websites, etc.).
So basically every file that is invididually accessible through
subversion (which means pretty much all of them) needs to have such a
header to be under ASL?
The ASL is not GPL and people can pretty much do everything they want with it.
So why this effort?
Just curious
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 4, 2006, at 12:40 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> > Someone please enlighten me
>>
>> Copyright notices and a license header allow someone examining that
>> work (in our case source files) to know the terms of distribution for
>> that work and who the author is.
>>
>> If the notice is not there, it must be assumed that all rights are
>> reserved by some 'unknown' copyright holder - meaning that you can
>> not
>> copy/modify/exhibit/redistribute/etc that work in any form.
>
> Well, of course ...but why do we have to have that in each and every
> file? What gets downloaded is a distribution - a whole package. Why
> can't we define terms of distribution and copyright for the whole
> distribution in one file?
Because we also publish them as individual files (see subversion,
viewcvs, websites, etc.).
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org>.
> > Someone please enlighten me
>
> Copyright notices and a license header allow someone examining that
> work (in our case source files) to know the terms of distribution for
> that work and who the author is.
>
> If the notice is not there, it must be assumed that all rights are
> reserved by some 'unknown' copyright holder - meaning that you can not
> copy/modify/exhibit/redistribute/etc that work in any form.
Well, of course ...but why do we have to have that in each and every
file? What gets downloaded is a distribution - a whole package. Why
can't we define terms of distribution and copyright for the whole
distribution in one file?
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 6/3/06, Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Honestly I have never understood what makes a license header necessary
> at all if it comes in a distribution that has a LICENSE file. Someone
> care to explain why that's not enough? Even less understandable for
> documentation.
>
> Someone please enlighten me
Copyright notices and a license header allow someone examining that
work (in our case source files) to know the terms of distribution for
that work and who the author is.
If the notice is not there, it must be assumed that all rights are
reserved by some 'unknown' copyright holder - meaning that you can not
copy/modify/exhibit/redistribute/etc that work in any form. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org>.
> > Good question! No; we don't have a NOTICE file for web sites. Instead, we
> > should do a "Terms of Use" or "Legal Information" link in the footer of web
> > pages to handle the same thing. We don't have one standard policy on this,
> > but this is what I think we should start doing. So nothing required to do
> > for web pages right now; we'll probably phase that in over time.
> >
> >> And does it apply to documentation files included in releases?
> >
> > Yes
Honestly I have never understood what makes a license header necessary
at all if it comes in a distribution that has a LICENSE file. Someone
care to explain why that's not enough? Even less understandable for
documentation.
Someone please enlighten me
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:51 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 03/06/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
>>> a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
>>> copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
>>> releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
>>> released on or after August 1, 2006.
>>
>> Does this also apply to HTML and other files published via the web-sites?
>
> Good question! No; we don't have a NOTICE file for web sites. Instead, we
> should do a "Terms of Use" or "Legal Information" link in the footer of web
> pages to handle the same thing. We don't have one standard policy on this,
> but this is what I think we should start doing. So nothing required to do
> for web pages right now; we'll probably phase that in over time.
>
>> And does it apply to documentation files included in releases?
>
> Yes
Some projects include their site in the release as documentation. Does
that cause problems? Does the site then become a Yes?
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 4, 2006, at 9:40 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 04/06/06, Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
>> On 6/4/06, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > "Includes or references"
>> >
>> > If the LICENSE file "includes" all the licenses, is there a
>> > preferred/mandated way to indicate where one ends and the next one
>> > starts?
>>
>> Once again, please see:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE
>>
>> HTH. -- justin
>>
>
> [Yes that does help - sorry I had forgotten about that.]
>
> However, I can't see it mentioned in the proposed announcement, which
> is what I was commenting on.
>
> One might guess that the httpd project would be likely to use the
> correct forms of the LICENSE and NOTICE files, but that is not a
> given...
This policy was specifically just taking on the issue of source file
headers and copyright notices, not license placement. However, your
comment makes me think that it might be worth addressing the license
placement issue at the same time, since I would guess others will
have similar questions. The question is partly addressed in http://
apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new, but I've been meaning to
revise that page. I'll put something together in the next couple
days and send it here.
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 04/06/06, Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On 6/4/06, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Includes or references"
> >
> > If the LICENSE file "includes" all the licenses, is there a
> > preferred/mandated way to indicate where one ends and the next one
> > starts?
>
> Once again, please see:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE
>
> HTH. -- justin
>
[Yes that does help - sorry I had forgotten about that.]
However, I can't see it mentioned in the proposed announcement, which
is what I was commenting on.
One might guess that the httpd project would be likely to use the
correct forms of the LICENSE and NOTICE files, but that is not a
given...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 6/4/06, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Includes or references"
>
> If the LICENSE file "includes" all the licenses, is there a
> preferred/mandated way to indicate where one ends and the next one
> starts?
Once again, please see:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE
HTH. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 04/06/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:51 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > On 03/06/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
<snip/>
> >> 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> >> third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> >> notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
> >>
> >
> > Are there any rules for delimiting the additional notices to make it
> > easier to see their boundaries?
>
> I'm not sure I completely understand what you're asking here. There
> are some licenses that require a particular attribution be included
> in every distribution. The NOTICE collects these various
> attributions and notices so that they are always carried forward in
> future distributions.
Sorry, I was confusing the NOTICE and LICENSE files here.
Notices are short (probably one paragraph), and it should be obvious
where one ends and the next one starts. Unlike licenses, see below.
> There are also some licenses that require that the entire license
> itself be included in every distribution; these licenses should *not*
> be copied into the NOTICE file. Copying into the NOTICE file would
> make it a lot bigger/convoluted, rather than a simple file with
> notices. Also, it would cause confusion about the distinction that
> the LICENSE file includes or references all applicable licensing
> terms and the NOTICE file is just for attribution notices.
"Includes or references"
If the LICENSE file "includes" all the licenses, is there a
preferred/mandated way to indicate where one ends and the next one
starts?
If using "references", what is the preferred/mandated way of doing this?
It would be useful to have some simple (and more complicated) examples
available.
Sebastian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org>.
On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:51 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 03/06/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
>> During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
>> a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
>> copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
>> releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
>> released on or after August 1, 2006.
>
> Does this also apply to HTML and other files published via the web-
> sites?
Good question! No; we don't have a NOTICE file for web sites.
Instead, we should do a "Terms of Use" or "Legal Information" link in
the footer of web pages to handle the same thing. We don't have one
standard policy on this, but this is what I think we should start
doing. So nothing required to do for web pages right now; we'll
probably phase that in over time.
> And does it apply to documentation files included in releases?
Yes
<snip/>
>> 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
>> third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
>> notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>>
>
> Are there any rules for delimiting the additional notices to make it
> easier to see their boundaries?
I'm not sure I completely understand what you're asking here. There
are some licenses that require a particular attribution be included
in every distribution. The NOTICE collects these various
attributions and notices so that they are always carried forward in
future distributions.
There are also some licenses that require that the entire license
itself be included in every distribution; these licenses should *not*
be copied into the NOTICE file. Copying into the NOTICE file would
make it a lot bigger/convoluted, rather than a simple file with
notices. Also, it would cause confusion about the distinction that
the LICENSE file includes or references all applicable licensing
terms and the NOTICE file is just for attribution notices.
Cliff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: New copyright header policy
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 03/06/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@apache.org> wrote:
> During the last ASF Board meeting, a resolution was passed to require
> a different licensing header in source files plus requirements for
> copyright notices. PMCs are not required to make any changes to past
> releases, but must apply these new rules to all distributions
> released on or after August 1, 2006.
Does this also apply to HTML and other files published via the web-sites?
And does it apply to documentation files included in releases?
> Before I send this out to committers@, I thought I'd start by sending
> it here to collect and answer any FAQ-type questions. So, here's the
> new policy; hit me with any questions you have.
>
> Thanks,
> Cliff
>
> --- New copyright notice and source header policy ---
>
> A. THIRD-PARTY COPYRIGHT NOTICES AND LICENSES
> 0. The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted
> directly to the ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. Do not modify or remove any copyright notices or licenses
> within third-party works.
> 2. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of any
> third-party source files.
> 3. Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files
> should typically be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the
> source for convenience.
> 4. Major modifications/additions to third-party should be dealt
> with on a case-by-case basis by the PMC.
>
> B. SOURCE FILE HEADERS
> 0. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF
> by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
> 1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice
> included in it, the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
> a. remove such notices, or
> b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project release, or
> c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal
> or relocation of the notices.
> 2. Each source file should include the following license header --
> note that there should be no copyright notice in the header:
>
> Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
> or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> distributed with this work for additional information
> regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> specific language governing permissions and limitations
> under the License.
>
> C. NOTICE FILE
> 0. Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the
> top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file
> 1. The top of each NOTICE file should include the following text,
> suitably modified to reflect the product name and year(s) of
> distribution of the current and past versions of the product:
>
> Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
> Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> 2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright
> notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF (see B.1.).
>
Are there any rules for delimiting the additional notices to make it
easier to see their boundaries?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org