incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Bognar <james.bog...@salesforce.com>
Subject Re: Images in source code.
Date Sat, 03 Jun 2017 16:12:21 GMT
Thanks everyone who replied.

The reason I asked is because we've previously been asked about ownership
of image files during release votes, so I wasn't sure if we were supposed
to mark them somehow.

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 9:46 AM John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:20 PM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi James,
> >
> > Everything that is not explicitly called out in the top level NOTICE and
> > LICENSE files are licensed under the Apache 2.0 license.
> >
> > Adding a file to this directory might mislead people into thinking that
> > they need to perform more due diligence with other files in other
> > directories.
> >
> > My advice is to *not* add anything. Let the images be licensed per the
> > terms the top level LICENSE file.
> >
>
> Agreed.  What we do like to make sure is called out is if there is
> provenance that these images came from somewhere else.  If these images
> were not created by you and were not already under apache license, then we
> would have a concern.
>
>
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > > On Jun 2, 2017, at 2:20 PM, James Bognar <james.bognar@salesforce.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > I haven't found a metadata editor that works yet, so I'll just add a
> > > LICENSE.txt file to the directory.  Hopefully that's enough.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 6/2/17 1:15 PM, James Bognar wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I just added several png files to the source tree of our podling. 
I
> > >>> created them myself.  Are there any best-practices on how to mark
> > these as
> > >>> Apache licensed?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> I'm not sure of a good way to track this. I'm not sure if png supports
> > >> arbitrary metadata which could be edited. Some ways I've seen used
> > >> elsewhere to try to better propagate license/ownership:
> > >>
> > >> * Comments on the issue-tracker issue that introduced them citing
> > >> origin/source (typically for images that are copied, not created)
> > >> * Entry in LICENSE/NOTICE (shouldn't be done unnecessarily, of course)
> > >> * A README in the same directory with relevant info
> > >>
> > >> If the images are of the podling's creation, I wouldn't be
> particularly
> > >> worried. The copyright notice on your source-release and LICENSE are
> > >> sufficient to inform downstream consumers.
> > >>
> > >> Probably not the answer you're looking for, but hope it helps :)
> > >>
> > >> - Josh
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Bognar
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > clr@apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
-- 
James Bognar

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message