From dev-return-11241-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Mon Mar 08 13:05:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 186 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2004 13:05:37 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Mar 2004 13:05:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 54726 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2004 13:05:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 54691 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2004 13:05:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 54677 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2004 13:05:34 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: suntzu.lyra.org: gstein set sender to gstein@lyra.org using -f Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 05:08:30 -0800 From: Greg Stein To: kfogel@collab.net, dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Licensing of find_apr.m4 and find_apu.m4? Message-ID: <20040308050830.B1267@lyra.org> Mail-Followup-To: kfogel@collab.net, dev@apr.apache.org References: <2147483647.1078573373@[10.0.1.105]> <200403080034.i280Yu714006@newton.ch.collab.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200403080034.i280Yu714006@newton.ch.collab.net>; from kfogel@collab.net on Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:34:56PM -0600 X-URL: http://www.lyra.org/greg/ X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:34:56PM -0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz writes: >... > > As a solution, the Creative Commons Public Domain dedication comes to > > mind (. I'm not > > sure if that goes too far, but perhaps not. > > > > Thoughts? -- justin > > +1. Oh, want something more specific than "+1"? :-) How about this: > > # This file is in the public domain; the Apache Software Foundation > # gives unlimited permission to copy, distribute and modify it. Looks good as a start. How about if the statement includes all parts aspects of copyright (i.e. public performance, etc). Hmm. Section 2 of the Apache License looks pretty good. Mebbe we can say it is subject to only that: 2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. Of course, then we have section 3 to deal with (patent licenses). So just section 2 might not be workable. I'm thinking we might want to stick with the Apache License, but state that certain pieces do not apply. Specifically, I think it may only be 4d that should be stricken. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/