incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <>
Subject Re: File headers for third party utility code
Date Mon, 04 Jan 2016 23:02:23 GMT
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Todd Lipcon <> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm working on verifying licenses and copyrights, etc, in Apache Kudu
> (incubating). There is one area I wanted to confirm the right way to
> document in our LICENSE/NOTICE files:
> Kudu makes use of a lot of open source utility code borrowed from (or
> adapted from) other open source projects. In particular, we've borrowed a
> lot of code from Chromium's "base" module[1] which is licensed under a BSD
> 3-clause license[2]. We also have some code from Google Supersonic[3]
> licensed under the Apache License[4]. The majority of this borrowed code is
> under a 'gutil' directory in the Kudu tree[5]. We also have some small
> amounts of code borrowed from LevelDB under the BSD license[6].

I am in exactly the same boat dealing with Copyright statements of code
borrowed from Postgres.

> Given that all of the borrowed code is under the Apache or BSD licenses,
> the inclusion of the code is completely allowable under the license terms.
> The only question is the best way to document the inclusion to best follow
> established ASF practices. My understanding is that we should:
> 1) Maintain the original copyright notices and license headers in the files.

Correct. Unless you're a copyright holder or an authorized representative
of one, you're not allowed to touch existing copyright notices in files.

> 2) In the cases that we've made non-trivial changes to the source, we
> should additionally add the ASF copyright notice at the top of the file,
> and amend the original copyright statement with the words "Some portions"
> as we've done for example in[7].

I don't think you need to do that, but you do need an ASF license header.

I don't think ASF encourages "Portions Copyright ... ASF" statements
on individual files.

> 3) In all files (regardless of whether we've made changes), we should add
> the Apache license header above any existing license headers, while
> maintaining the existing one.

Correct and it should also solve #2

> 4) In the LICENSE file, we should make note of the included code and its
> copyrights as we have done here[8].

I tend to be in the camp that values simplicity of LICENSE file. IOW,
this need to be a succinct communication of what an overall license
for the source bundle is and that's ALv2.

You do need to update NOTICE files accordingly though.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message