incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release cassandra 0.4.0-beta1
Date Tue, 18 Aug 2009 05:51:10 GMT
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Craig L Russell<Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Ant,
>
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 8:40 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Craig L Russell<Craig.Russell@sun.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ant,
>>>
>>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 7:33 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:04 PM, sebb<sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  >> the NOTICE file looks acceptable to me too.
>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>  > AIUI, the NOTICE file needs to give attributions to all 3rd
party
>>>>>> code
>>>>>>  > included in the propose release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> no - just require 3rd party attribution notices and relocated
>>>>>>  copyrights (see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice)
>>>>>
>>>>> So all the 3rd party licenses need to be checked to see if they
>>>>> require attribution or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've only checked one - Antlr - and AFAICT that does require
>>>>> attribution (notice).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The contents of the NOTICE file is another area I think is not so
>>>> precisely defined.
>>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice says:
>>>>
>>>> "The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
>>>> third-party notices"
>>>
>>> The NOTICE file is where downstream consumers of Apache software expect
>>> to
>>> find *all* *required* third-party notices.
>>>>
>>>> but there is nothing that defines what are "required third-party
>>>> notices". The ANTLR license (http://www.antlr.org/license.html) says:
>>>>
>>>> "Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
>>>> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
>>>> documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution."
>>>
>>> When a notice includes the words "required", "must", "shall", or other
>>> imperative, then the notice is considered to be a "required third-party
>>> notice". And it should therefore be placed into the top level NOTICE file
>>> of
>>> the distribution.
>>
>> But if thats what we take as the meaning then that would mean the
>> entire ANTLR license should be included in the NOTICE file because the
>> ANTLR license clause is asking for three things to be reproduced:
>>
>> 1) the above copyright notice
>> 2) this list of conditions
>> 3) the following disclaimer
>>
>> So is the suggestion then that all those three things be included in
>> the NOTICE file?
>
> Yes! This is the "required notice" that we're talking about.
>

I don't agree. There's nothing in any ASF policy docs that i can find
to back that up and the discussion on legal-discuss@ about LEGAL-59
agrees that nothing is needed in the NOTICE file for BSD licenses -
http://apache.markmail.org/message/4ldaiay2vrzmlgxe

So again, +1 from me to release this as is.

   ...ant

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


Mime
View raw message