incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: Question related derivative code based on our Apache licensed code
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:53:25 GMT

----- Original Message -----
> From: Simon Phipps <>
> To:
> Cc: 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 3:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Question related derivative code based on our Apache licensed code
> On 4 Jan 2012, at 20:28, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>  It depends on how that is actually done:
> There is indeed plenty of detail to take into consideration, and we could 
> ping-pong the discussion around many nuances if we wanted to (for example: 
> there's often no need to edit the file to change the way it is licensed as 
> part of a larger work). 
> One benefit there seems to be from having me join a thread is people add a lot 
> more detail to the discussion in order to correct me, even when we agree. 
> Suffice to say we're generally agreed that Jürgen's original assumption 
> ("This code becomes automatically Apache licensed, correct?") is 
> probably not right :-)

Yes, well the point I'm trying to make is that for *our* purposes (eg interpreting the
licensing on a "contribution" to a derivative work) the *unmodified files* that
are only marked as having Apache license headers in them govern patches based
solely on such files, irrespective of the licensing on a larger derivative work
of the whole work.  *And* that such unmodified files will be present in 
many derivatives that make use of our codebase.

I realize that wasn't quite the question Jürgen asked, but it's a better question
to address ;-).  Sorry for the potential confusion.

View raw message