incubator-jena-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Seaborne <>
Subject Re: Missing NOTICE Information?
Date Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:01:16 GMT

Thank you for the checking.  Very much appreciated.

Some comments/questions, if I may ...

On 23/11/11 00:42, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Since IP clearance appears to have been done, I did an SVN update to take a
> look at the latest organization of the code.
>   I am concerned that the NOTICE information may be incomplete.
> For example, Jena2/jena/trunk/src/main/java/com/hp/hpl/jena/
> has the standard ALv2 "Licensed to" comment with its reference to the NOTICE
> file.
> A possible concern for handling before an incubation release is appropriate:
> This file previously had a Copyright notice of Hewlett-Packard Development
> Company, LP.  At the foot of the page were the license conditions that applied
> previously.
> However, the first NOTICE file in the path back to Jena2 is
> Jena2/jena/trunk/NOTICE, which says
> Apache Jena
> Copyright 2011 The Apache Software Foundation
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (
> which is incomplete.  I suspect it is only used for projects that are
> exclusively developed at the ASF.

This has always confused me a bit.

Even for code developed while at ASF, the copyright ownership is not 
handed from contributor/employer to ASF, it's granted via an ICLA/CCLA. 
  If that's right, then a software grant from previous code is no 
different to currently developed code.

In fact the CCLA says "it [the license] does not change your rights to 
use you own Contributions for any othe purpose."

which I read as meaning you still copyright-own the contribution, and 
have not handed copyright over to ASF.

Clause 2: Grant of Copyright License.

i.e. it's a license, not a transfer of copyright.

Is that right?

I don't see long lists of copyrights in other projects NOTICE files (not 
that that is proof); I do see more in LICENSE than NOTICE.

> Also, Jena2/jena/trunk/LICENSE
> has the expected ALv2 and also a statement about code contributed by Plugged
> In Software.
> I believe the Plugged In Software notice goes in NOTICE

My mistake; it needs fixing.  I thought the LICENSE file was sufficient 
and correct.

While we may be able to redo the situation with Plugged In Software, it 
will take an arbitrary length of time.

> and that there must
> also be something about the H-P Development Company copyright and source of
> other code.  If copyright was transferred (a mentor might be able to check),
> the wording might be different, but something like the Plugged in Software
> notice would be appropriate if not (and maybe even if copyright was
> transferred).

HP granted to ASF; it was not a copyright transfer but is anything ever 
a copyright transfer?

The Plugged In Software case is different - we are using BSD-licensed code.

(Any one want to rewrite the ExtendedHandler and remove the issue?)

> I don't have access to all of the facts.  I just noticed this situation and
> thought it important to check to see if the current treatment is appropriate
> with respect to SGA-covered code.
>   - Dennis

Very important.


View raw message