You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to community@apache.org by Tetsuya Kitahata <te...@nifty.com> on 2004/03/04 01:38:05 UTC
Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Dear folks @ community,
Hello.
One question came to my mind about the licensing issue.
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 04:19:01 -0800
Greg Stein wrote:
> - author tags are officially discouraged. these create difficulties in
> establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> committers. there are other social issues dealing with collaborative
> development, but the Board is concerned about the legal ramifications
> around the use of author tags
I think it that perhaps we should pay much attentin to the licensing
issue upon websites in ***.apache.org, too (not sure .. correct me if
i am wrong)
I could see some XML files (e.g. files in "site" module) having
<author> tags (/document/properties/author)
which contained real person's names and e-mail addresses.
Should we also change these old customs ? I mean, usage of
real person's names in author tags should be discouraged ?
# e.g. (Preferable?)
# "site" module:
# <author email="apache.AT.apache.DOT.org">The Apache Software Foundation</author>
# "jakarta-site2" module:
# <author email="general.AT.jakarta.DOT.apache.DOT.org">Apache Jakarta Project</author>
I do appreciate any inputs/comments/suggestions.
T.I.A.
Sincerely,
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tetsuya Kitahata -- Terra-International, Inc.
E-mail: tetsuya@apache.org http://www.terra-intl.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>.
From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <st...@apache.org>
> [...]
> Food for thought.
Slick ideas, I love them...
regards
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>>FYI, Gumpy (the python version of gump) is currently checking for the
>>existance of the license file in all packages.
>>
>>It would be possible and rather simple to add a list of identifiers for
>>the various licenses (maybe using the OSI urls as URIs?) to the project
>>metadata descriptors in the gump repository and then write a rule engine
>>that identifies potential legal issues with the combination of those
>>identifiers.
>
>
> Some sort of automated system for checking things sounds really cool,
> actually. Once policy is defined and accepted. :)
Awesome, we'll add it to the TODO list of the Gump project.
--
Stefano.
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> FYI, Gumpy (the python version of gump) is currently checking for the
> existance of the license file in all packages.
>
> It would be possible and rather simple to add a list of identifiers for
> the various licenses (maybe using the OSI urls as URIs?) to the project
> metadata descriptors in the gump repository and then write a rule engine
> that identifies potential legal issues with the combination of those
> identifiers.
Some sort of automated system for checking things sounds really cool,
actually. Once policy is defined and accepted. :)
Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
> On Mar 12, 2004, at 3:18 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> It would be possible and rather simple to add a list of identifiers
>> for the various licenses (maybe using the OSI urls as URIs?) to the
>> project
>
>
> Aye - or use some of the URI pointers to (our own or OSI) defintiions in
> RDF as used by creative commons folks.
not sure I want to touch RDF just yet, as you know pretty well, it tends
to scare the crap out of people ;-)
Having unique identifiers would be good enough for a starting point.
So, suggestions? should we use OSI URLs as URI or come up with our own?
We could, later down the road, crystallize license combinatory logic
into an ontology. That would make soooo many people here at MIT/Harvard
soooo happy, but let's not start with flexibility syndrome but let's
just solve the problem we are having now, which is the explosion of
licensing dependencies.
If we go down this road, official support from the board in
communicating with OSI for this licensing identifying mechanism would be
extremely helpful.
Anyway, I think we just found the first application of semantic web
technologies for apache :-)
--
Stefano.
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@asemantics.com>.
On Mar 12, 2004, at 3:18 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> It would be possible and rather simple to add a list of identifiers
> for the various licenses (maybe using the OSI urls as URIs?) to the
> project
Aye - or use some of the URI pointers to (our own or OSI) defintiions
in RDF as used by creative commons folks.
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, J Aaron Farr wrote:
>
>>However, mx4j is a good example because apparently it includes code licensed
>>under the Jetty and Jython licenses [2]. While I am not intimately familiar
>>with mx4j, this may mean that the total legal effect of using mx4j is not
>>contained within the mx4j license alone, but is in fact a combination of the
>>terms of the three licenses. Since this combination may in fact be more
>>restrictive than the terms in the mx4j license alone, the library may not be in
>>the clear to be used by ASF projects. To confirm this, one would need to
>>investigate all three licenses, understand which parts of mx4j fall outside of
>>its own license, and then come to a decision on how the library can be used in
>>the ASF.
>>
>>It is exactly this sort of confusion the ASF would like to avoid.
>
>
> Thank you, jaaron, for articulating this. Indeed, this is what we'd like
> to avoid - confusion and surprises for ourselves, as well as confusion and
> surprises for those who use and redistribute Apache software.
FYI, Gumpy (the python version of gump) is currently checking for the
existance of the license file in all packages.
It would be possible and rather simple to add a list of identifiers for
the various licenses (maybe using the OSI urls as URIs?) to the project
metadata descriptors in the gump repository and then write a rule engine
that identifies potential legal issues with the combination of those
identifiers.
This would allow, for example, the licensing committee to explore policy
changes and outline the legal impact of those changes to the various
legal dependencies in our tree.
It is also possible to *validate* those legal assertions by matching the
license file, therefore understand if a particular project is changing
his license overtime (gump deals with CVS directly!) which would trigger
not only an alarm of potential future issues for code dependencies but
also for legal dependencies.
Food for thought.
--
Stefano.
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> However, mx4j is a good example because apparently it includes code licensed
> under the Jetty and Jython licenses [2]. While I am not intimately familiar
> with mx4j, this may mean that the total legal effect of using mx4j is not
> contained within the mx4j license alone, but is in fact a combination of the
> terms of the three licenses. Since this combination may in fact be more
> restrictive than the terms in the mx4j license alone, the library may not be in
> the clear to be used by ASF projects. To confirm this, one would need to
> investigate all three licenses, understand which parts of mx4j fall outside of
> its own license, and then come to a decision on how the library can be used in
> the ASF.
>
> It is exactly this sort of confusion the ASF would like to avoid.
Thank you, jaaron, for articulating this. Indeed, this is what we'd like
to avoid - confusion and surprises for ourselves, as well as confusion and
surprises for those who use and redistribute Apache software.
Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by J Aaron Farr <fa...@apache.org>.
Quoting Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>:
>
> Should I understand that we could no more include third-party jars in
> ASF products, for example mx4j jars in Tomcat ?
This is not a complete prohibition on all third-party jars or libraries, but
only on those third-party libraries which are licensed under terms more
restrictive than the ASL.
In the case of mx4j, the code is licenced under the mx4j 1.0 License [1], which
is a derivative of the ASL 1.1 license and therefore may potentially be included
in ASF works.
However, mx4j is a good example because apparently it includes code licensed
under the Jetty and Jython licenses [2]. While I am not intimately familiar
with mx4j, this may mean that the total legal effect of using mx4j is not
contained within the mx4j license alone, but is in fact a combination of the
terms of the three licenses. Since this combination may in fact be more
restrictive than the terms in the mx4j license alone, the library may not be in
the clear to be used by ASF projects. To confirm this, one would need to
investigate all three licenses, understand which parts of mx4j fall outside of
its own license, and then come to a decision on how the library can be used in
the ASF.
It is exactly this sort of confusion the ASF would like to avoid. While the
mx4j developers may in fact be perfectly in compliance with using the Jetty and
Jython licenses, users of mx4j will have to take into consideration not one, but
_three_ licenses in order to determine how to legally use the library.
Therefore, for the sake of our users it is best if an ASF product as a whole is
licensed under terms no more restrictive than those set out in the ASL 2.0.
For further inquries (including a specific resolution to the mx4j issue), I
would suggest subscribing to the licensing@apache.org list.
---
jaaron <http://jadetower.org>
[1]
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/mx4j/mx4j/src/etc/LICENSE?content-type=text%2Fplain&rev=1.3
[2] http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/mx4j/mx4j/src/etc/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Clarifying some licensing issues for Apache developers
Posted by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> It seems worthwhile to state something that probably most people are
aware
> of, but a few recent incidents suggest is worth repeating. Followups are
> being directed to licensing@apache.org, a list that is private to Apache
> committers, where legal issues are discussed. Please subscribe to that
> list (requires approval) before posting to it.
>
> First off, thank you to everyone who has transitioned to the new Apache
> License 2.0. It is a board mandate that *all* software distributed
by the
> Apache Software Foundation be under this new license. This has some
> subtle and not-so-subtle ramifications people should be aware of.
>
> *) Only software packages created by the Apache Software Foundation
may be
> redistributed from Apache's servers and mirrors. This means no tarballs
> or binaries from other authors or organizations. We realize that
many ASF
> projects depend upon other software, and that these dependencies may make
> it difficult for new users to bootstrap quickly. There are solutions to
> that problem outside of the ASF: ibiblio, sourceforge, CPAN, etc. The
> board might grant exceptions to this rule - bring it to us if you'd like
> us to consider it.
Should I understand that we could no more include third-party jars in
ASF products, for example mx4j jars in Tomcat ?
If it's the case this decision will put many, many users in big trouble
since they couldn't use anymore ready-to-run package (zip or tarball
containing everything needed for run).
As one of the founder of the JPackage Projet, www.jpackage.org, which
try to maintain a repository of java applications and libs, let me say
that the task is not so easy, and for now works only on RPM based boxes,
mostly Linux.
What should do non-RPM users ?
I could understand the board concern about incompatible license, but
when developpers select third-party software to make ASF products,
they take care of it isn't it ?
So I strongly suggest board to reconsider this point or we may see in
a near future ASF products distribution, containing both ASF and
required third party software, outside Apache servers and it will
not help users to find their way.
Am I exact in thinking that the original ASF goal is to provide real
products for real users, and that we should take care of users as much
as we take care of performance, stability ?
Regards
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Tetsuya Kitahata <te...@nifty.com>.
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:29:21 -0800
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > 1. Remove real names and e-mail addresses from all the
> > XML files in "site" module. -- /document/properties/author elements
> Do you have an example?
Okay. e.g. site/xdocs/dev/project-creation.xml
# brainy author, there is :)
-- Tetsuya <te...@apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Saturday, March 6, 2004 8:38 AM +0900 Tetsuya Kitahata
<te...@nifty.com> wrote:
> 1. Remove real names and e-mail addresses from all the
> XML files in "site" module. -- /document/properties/author elements
Do you have an example?
> 2. Put
> <author email="apache.AT.apache.DOT.org">The Apache Software
> Foundation</author> to all the XML files in "site" module.
I don't see the point of adding a bogus author entry. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Tetsuya Kitahata <te...@nifty.com>.
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:20:40 -0800
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > I'm going to clean up the www.apache.org site module
> What exactly are you going to be modifying? -- justin
1. Remove real names and e-mail addresses from all the
XML files in "site" module. -- /document/properties/author elements
2. Put
<author email="apache.AT.apache.DOT.org">The Apache Software Foundation</author>
to all the XML files in "site" module.
These assure us that all the files in "site" module are
published by the Apache Software Foundation. Also, people
would be able to know where to contact in order to put opinions
modification requests upon the contents of the website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tetsuya Kitahata -- Terra-International, Inc.
E-mail: tetsuya@apache.org http://www.terra-intl.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Saturday, March 6, 2004 6:32 AM +0900 Tetsuya Kitahata
<te...@nifty.com> wrote:
> I'm going to clean up the www.apache.org site module
What exactly are you going to be modifying? -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Tetsuya Kitahata <te...@nifty.com>.
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 09:41:27 +0100 Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2004, at 1:46 AM, Dave Brondsema wrote:
> > On Wednesday 03 March 2004 07:38 pm, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
> >> Greg Stein wrote:
> >>> - author tags are officially discouraged. these create
> >>> difficulties in
> ..
> >> <author> tags (/document/properties/author)
> (On a personal title): I think the operative word is 'discuraged'. They
> are not banned, forbidden or anything else - just a nudge that it is
> best practice to have them not in/near the code. But do not fret over
> it too much; certainly do not create more of them, and clean up is
> kinda nice - but lets make sure it does not distract us from doing real
> things/coding.
Okay. Thanks a ton.
I'm going to clean up the www.apache.org site module
in the next week (That goes for jakarta-site2 module, too),
if there's no remarkable objections.
The cleaning-up works seem not to affect to my real social
activities -- not severe burdens so much -- i believe.
Preferable habits/customs should be displayed in visible way,
for those who follow in the future. :) - Just balancing.
-- "Just DO IT" :-) --
-- Tetsuya. (tetsuya@apache.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@asemantics.com>.
Folks,
On Mar 4, 2004, at 1:46 AM, Dave Brondsema wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 March 2004 07:38 pm, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
>> Greg Stein wrote:
>>> - author tags are officially discouraged. these create
>>> difficulties in
..
>> <author> tags (/document/properties/author)
(On a personal title): I think the operative word is 'discuraged'. They
are not banned, forbidden or anything else - just a nudge that it is
best practice to have them not in/near the code. But do not fret over
it too much; certainly do not create more of them, and clean up is
kinda nice - but lets make sure it does not distract us from doing real
things/coding.
Note also that it is the author tags in specific files/bits of code;
attribution in a CHANGES file is still fine of course.
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Author tags (Re: ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004)
Posted by Dave Brondsema <br...@apache.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 03 March 2004 07:38 pm, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
> Dear folks @ community,
>
> Hello.
>
> One question came to my mind about the licensing issue.
>
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 04:19:01 -0800
>
> Greg Stein wrote:
> > - author tags are officially discouraged. these create difficulties in
> > establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> > committers. there are other social issues dealing with collaborative
> > development, but the Board is concerned about the legal ramifications
> > around the use of author tags
>
> I think it that perhaps we should pay much attentin to the licensing
> issue upon websites in ***.apache.org, too (not sure .. correct me if
> i am wrong)
>
> I could see some XML files (e.g. files in "site" module) having
> <author> tags (/document/properties/author)
> which contained real person's names and e-mail addresses.
>
> Should we also change these old customs ? I mean, usage of
> real person's names in author tags should be discouraged ?
>
> # e.g. (Preferable?)
> # "site" module:
> # <author email="apache.AT.apache.DOT.org">The Apache Software
> Foundation</author> # "jakarta-site2" module:
> # <author email="general.AT.jakarta.DOT.apache.DOT.org">Apache Jakarta
> Project</author>
>
> I do appreciate any inputs/comments/suggestions.
> T.I.A.
> Sincerely,
>
>
Forrest plans on removing the <author/> elements from our site's documents.
Also, we have previously kept the email address unused so that individuals
would not get contacted.
- --
Dave Brondsema
dave@brondsema.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFARnxyVvBSb5uzznARAmirAJ9Q+BU0dtyXkafXhy+tU/WL9/uMMACeLF+l
QhEi/Udm9DHErzH9kHN/ekw=
=Yro7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org