Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3D6479971 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 02:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24643 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2012 02:33:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 24259 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2012 02:33:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 24251 invoked by uid 99); 30 Mar 2012 02:33:08 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 02:33:08 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.97.132.119] (HELO homiemail-a85.g.dreamhost.com) (208.97.132.119) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 02:33:02 +0000 Received: from homiemail-a85.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a85.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7675BC041; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 19:32:41 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gbiv.com; h=content-type :mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; q=dns; s= gbiv.com; b=u2rmjW3/6vyv7+6R1kR/LIeG9S20p1wCfrupiyL9tF7utfrl7yJo 9U1BfMqcZAoTtyN0gHtdqwPpAfhhtCS4IwBRAQweTcy01+qiLf7WUBjRVkRGgD3+ 8pGj2Teg40YxHf8L2WHi5VHb/pg80rrK2Spp6bWhhBAU/yc0zyrJ3GM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gbiv.com; h=content-type :mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=gbiv.com; bh=/VG60G/65haUV5eiZU1kDpsAy5c=; b=WH+S9bNXmqUw9fa1bFoypbuSsya6 hV6LNoOpFnVoEY0plx4s93p2tY1oZy6c84YqCHDYfnfxzZbVHFbMPVv/37wO5den QoV90d038qp1WKGpKsWNOXgiMHytnZGm9srfOE3CGFR1V89ldaTn0RfydJbxIgkn wAna/LXl0Mvqwzo= Received: from [172.16.94.253] (33.45.9.109.rev.sfr.net [109.9.45.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: fielding@gbiv.com) by homiemail-a85.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0697ABC040; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 19:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Subject: Re: Multi-licensed dependencies From: "Roy T. Fielding" In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 04:32:33 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <60933D7A-E31C-47AF-9FBA-E6374BCABEB1@gbiv.com> To: general@incubator.apache.org, Marvin Humphrey X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Mar 29, 2012, at 9:37 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:42 AM, sebb wrote: >> On 29 March 2012 18:43, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >=20 >>> I prefer to put our license in the file and then, at the bottom, = refer >>> to a list of other licenses per dependency (if included in this = package), >>> wherein the dependency licenses are in separate files near the = dependency. >>=20 >> However, this does not agree with the following [1]: >>=20 >>>>>=20 >> ... >> When an artifact contains code under several licenses, the LICENSE >> file should contain details of all these licenses. For each component >> which is not Apache licensed, details of the component and the = license >> under which the component is distributed should be appended to the >> LICENSE file. >> <<< >>=20 >> [1] = http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-lic= enses Pointers are sufficient. > It is also at odds with the Apache HTTPD LICENSE file we've been = treating as a > canonical sample. The documentation on www.apache.org/dev may have = been > contaminated by well-meaning volunteers and changed from Roy's = original > meaning, but I assume that the HTTPD LICENSE and NOTICE files haven't = gotten > away from him and are still 100% consonant with both the letter and = the intent > of the ALv2. I know more about the letter and intent of the ASF's license and = licensing policy than anyone else at the foundation. This was discussed and = approved on the licensing list some time ago. > While Roy's suggestion of referencing licenses spread over multiple = files > seems like a perfectly sane alternative, I'd argue against documenting = it as > best practice unless HTTPD changes their LICENSE file to match. httpd's license refers to small snippets of code all over the tree; all = of the licenses are fairly close to BSD. It is simply more convenient to list all of those in one place. Inclusion of entire jar files is = different. As is including huge and nasty license files, like the GPL. You do not want to mix all those licenses together, particularly since most of = those licenses won't be included in your source distributions. Also, you cannot mix the GPL license in with the others. We are not shipping a combined work as GPL. We can ship an aggregated work, = wherein the aggregation consists of separate components in separate directories with their own license files, or we can ship an overlayed work -- where the GPL distribution is unpacked on top of an Apache-licensed = distribution. ....Roy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org