Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-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 18D36E31E for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:04:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 95752 invoked by uid 500); 31 Jan 2013 18:04:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95703 invoked by uid 500); 31 Jan 2013 18:04:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95694 invoked by uid 99); 31 Jan 2013 18:04:49 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:04:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com designates 66.165.176.89 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.165.176.89] (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM) (66.165.176.89) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:04:45 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,578,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="5840981" Received: from sjcpmailmx02.citrite.net ([10.216.14.75]) by FTLPIPO01.CITRIX.COM with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 31 Jan 2013 18:04:23 +0000 Received: from SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net ([10.216.4.73]) by SJCPMAILMX02.citrite.net ([10.216.14.75]) with mapi; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:04:22 -0800 From: Chiradeep Vittal To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:04:23 -0800 Subject: Re: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache License 2.0 Thread-Topic: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache License 2.0 Thread-Index: Ac3/3WXiWg1XK8EdSh2OUmQEzF2EUQ== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <81A73678E76EA642801C8F2E4823AD21014183070754@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Doesn't matter who owns the copyright. It wasn't developed in the Apache repository and was never part of the original donation from Citrix. On 1/31/13 2:29 AM, "Donal Lafferty" wrote: >The code isn't entirely third party. > >The source I incorporated is clearly derived from Cloud.com (now >Citrix's) Hyper-V driver. As soon as it was moved to a different file, >the Cloud.com copyright was deleted. However, the code I use is a >copy/paste job from the original driver. > >Rather than use the current driver, I could use the driver from Diablo, >which is wholly copyright of Cloud.com (now Citrix) > >DL > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us] >> Sent: 31 January 2013 05:35 >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache >>License 2.0 >>=20 >> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Donal Lafferty >> >> wrote: >> > I have a specific question on incorporating existing code under Apache >> License 2.0 that I forgot to ask earlier in the month. >> > >> > My Hyper-V plugin calls down to modified versions of the OpenStack >>Nova >> driver for Hyper-V. >> > >> > In my repo, I've: >> > >> > 1. Retained the original copyright notice. >> > >> > 2. Added an additional copyright notice mentioning the creator >>of the >> derivate work, which in this case is Citrix. >> > >> > 3. Verified that OpenStack Nova's LICENSE is Apache License V2.0 >> > >> > Are these steps sufficient to add the code to Apache CloudStack? >> > >> > E.g. does Apache Version 2.0 require that the original project be >>mentioned >> in our NOTICE file? >>=20 >> sigh (and despite my sigh - thanks for bringing the issue up on the >>list, it >> would have been bad to find this out on review) This is effectively >>third party >> code, if you are actually including it (as opposed to it being a >>dependency) it >> needs to go through IP Clearance as well as be noted in our legal docs. >>=20 >> --David