all licenses go into the LICENSE file (was: Re: [VOTE] approve release of OpenJPA 0.9.7)

[Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>]

On Apr 25, 2007, at 6:23 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 April 2007 11:55, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>>   * OpenJPA includes software developed by the SERP project
>>>     Copyright (c) 2002-2006, A. Abram White. All rights reserved.
>>>
>>> The "All rights reserved." means that it has not been
>>> properly licensed, and I as the licensee of OpenJPA will have
>>> no rights to it either.
>>>
>>> Clarification, please.
>>
>> Serp is BSD-licensed. I'm not sure if that answers the clarification,
>> but seems like it's a useful tidbit. If I understand correctly, the
>> call-out in LICENSE.txt handles that case sufficiently.
>
> Ahhhh... I now see that the LICENSE file contains all the licenses  
> appended
> after each other. Not exactly my personal preference, but Ok.

A more detailed draft policy that has been circulated on board@ some  
months ago (I don't think its on the web yet) by our legal VP (a.k.a.  
Cliff) specifies that all these licenses go into the LICENSE file.

The main reason that the policy is of draft status is that Cliff  
doesn't have enough cycles to take care of it all. A legal committee  
has been formed recently which will hopefully help address, so that  
this kind of information becomes sufficiently public.

I believe some information rests within the legal-discuss archives

   http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/

but I don't subscribe to that list.

A rule of thumb -- when in doubt, follow the example set by httpd...

   http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE


cheers,


Leo


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: all licenses go into the LICENSE file (was: Re: [VOTE] approve release of OpenJPA 0.9.7)

[Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>]

On 4/30/07, Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com> wrote:
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 6:23 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > On Wednesday 25 April 2007 11:55, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >>>   * OpenJPA includes software developed by the SERP project
> >>>     Copyright (c) 2002-2006, A. Abram White. All rights reserved.
> >>>
> >>> The "All rights reserved." means that it has not been
> >>> properly licensed, and I as the licensee of OpenJPA will have
> >>> no rights to it either.
> >>>
> >>> Clarification, please.
> >>
> >> Serp is BSD-licensed. I'm not sure if that answers the clarification,
> >> but seems like it's a useful tidbit. If I understand correctly, the
> >> call-out in LICENSE.txt handles that case sufficiently.
> >
> > Ahhhh... I now see that the LICENSE file contains all the licenses
> > appended
> > after each other. Not exactly my personal preference, but Ok.
>
> A more detailed draft policy that has been circulated on board@ some
> months ago (I don't think its on the web yet) by our legal VP (a.k.a.
> Cliff) specifies that all these licenses go into the LICENSE file.
>
> The main reason that the policy is of draft status is that Cliff
> doesn't have enough cycles to take care of it all. A legal committee
> has been formed recently which will hopefully help address, so that
> this kind of information becomes sufficiently public.
>
> I believe some information rests within the legal-discuss archives
>
>    http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/
>
> but I don't subscribe to that list.
>
> A rule of thumb -- when in doubt, follow the example set by httpd...
>
>    http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE

Yes -- excellent advice.  It's true that we don't have one dedicated
document that says this anywhere, but it has been buried in this page
for years: http://apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new:

"If the distribution also contains source files not owned by the ASF,
such as third-party libraries, then be sure to leave their licenses
intact. In some cases, you may want to ask the author(s) of
third-party code to relicense it under the 2.0 license, since that
will simplify the distribution. Otherwise, you should append their
license(s) to the LICENSE file at the top of the distribution, or at
least put a pointer in the LICENSE file to the third-party license. "

Cliff

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org