Return-Path: 
 <flex-dev-return-8780-apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A00F8C044
	for <apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Fri,  8 Jun 2012 16:07:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 34425 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jun 2012 16:07:50 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33836 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jun 2012 16:07:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:flex-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <flex-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33819 invoked by uid 99); 8 Jun 2012 16:07:50 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:07:50 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of sa3ruby@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.175 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.160.175] (HELO mail-gh0-f175.google.com)
 (209.85.160.175)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:07:44 +0000
Received: by ghbz2 with SMTP id z2so1299538ghb.6
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=8XAD683y5hNWRtNWIvN4WI8hNEeI5TtovEFPkiBNvXM=;
        b=IXWdj/nu+jmnat4pXLZWEwtkbNvWmaPQE+1wNco7zKMbHgE2Qni4WSDxQT0xmwHeJ8
         E6sPSuebT9+7rVDr/ms1Fo33dfbooVZktPScR2/Kh2L55GNMgmYFnv4e1DvXyQy2k56p
         cahet87fA7sUdP2zTQUh0HIJp3XyDxjJKRF04AzhA2M9gKkPK4UL95z9Ct35CzRNUBfI
         KKoWPjQKZYGpK5TazgsoTs9qmh2MeeHzx+C6bO/E7n9CnXWdeUja+o4M5SGcX0FAbIDe
         iPfzLcotb/jDl3NnxffADqzJmrKiHjVW94p/6BHhIhry2EkxCVPD45KCkTGbC8bG4eol
         xMqg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.197.167 with SMTP id iv7mr3045501igc.32.1339171642782; Fri,
 08 Jun 2012 09:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: sa3ruby@gmail.com
Received: by 10.231.17.196 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 09:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+=EWnC+zCqG8dDvN7Tsdbtt9aaDO+=JgiTeWYbE7jGt1sWtDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CBF4FC1E.414E2%aharui@adobe.com>
	<CAKWVykXYXcA6D0+7J5A0V1chSLbhK60u5wCqiGr_NeiZAcmdPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<6C3B1705-9388-4A6E-9CB1-B0EB5596C9A1@gbiv.com>
	<CA+=EWnC+zCqG8dDvN7Tsdbtt9aaDO+=JgiTeWYbE7jGt1sWtDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:07:22 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: J4SJBY-ujYGsFVvleXSKU1d-wys
Message-ID: 
 <CAFG6u8EgpdZjkaCoQx=i15ANXCvJmofhRW+wMEm6ipDgQ8eGEw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MENTORS] Third Party source
From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
>> I fear we are miscommunicating again.
>> Only the copyright owner is allowed to (re)move copyright notices
>> or permit others to (re)move them on the owner's behalf.
>
> Interesting, why is that? Is it so by the law?

It would be helpful if somebody could point out the actual words in
the copyright headers being discussed.  I may have missed it.

The copyright holder may impose limits on copying.  I have seen
headers that say, in effect, that you are welcome to copy the source
as long as you retain this header intact.

Meanwhile, much of the goodwill the ASF has accumulated over the years
is due to our policy of only accepting voluntary contributions.  We
should not throw that away lightly.

In this case, Adobe isn't hard to reach here.  We should seek their
opinion, and respect it.

If Adobe wishes us to retain the headers, my opinion is that we should
evaluate the impact that such a request will have on the community,
and either follow their request or decline the contribution.

If Adobe collectively takes the time to understand our position and
agrees to moving it, there are a number of ways that this can be
expressed clearly.  I still maintain that having an Adobe employee do
such a move would be the simplest and clearest way, but other ways are
possible too.

> Kalle

- Sam Ruby