www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: LICENSE and NOTICE files and SVN
Date Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:29:37 GMT
Hi Bill,

On Jan 13, 2008, at 4:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> David Jencks wrote:
>> 1. Could you explain your concept of "website" as an artifact  
>> here?  It seems to me that its entirely possible to view a  
>> particular file via svn without knowing much of anything about  
>> what else may be in svn.  Why isn't it required to include the  
>> contents of the NOTICE file in every source file?  I don't really  
>> see how we could expect anyone to find the applicable NOTICE file  
>> in svn otherwise.
> It is sufficient to assume that people understand hierarchies, and  
> that
> for .../src/apache/org/coolclass/coolclass.java, one can find a NOTICE
> and LICENSE in .../src/apache/org/coolclass/, failing that in
> .../src/apache/org/, failing that in .../src/apache/, and finally
> failing that in .../src.  But somewhere in the chain these must exist,
> per ASF policy.

This isn't practical for projects containing multiple src directories.
>> 2. Assuming that it's plausible for a NOTICE file to be in svn in  
>> some more or less well defined location, what are the PMC  
>> responsibilities for assuring its accuracy?  For instance, suppose  
>> someone includes some source code that requires a change to the  
>> NOTICE file, but no one notices this is necessary for a period of  
>> time - a minute, a day, a week, until the next release.  IIUC one  
>> of the major responsibilities of the PMC vote on a release is to  
>> assure the accuracy of the NOTICE files in it.  Does  regarding  
>> the svn repo as a distribution imply that the PMC must vote on  
>> every commit to assure the NOTICE file is up to date?  If not,  
>> what accuracy can we assume in the NOTICE file?
> It's sufficient to correct any oversight the moment it's noticed, and
> there's a reason we call svn management either review-then-commit, or
> commit-then-review.  In both cases there is a *review* :)
> There's a different standard applied to svn vs. a release, as you just
> implied.  That's not a reason to intentionally fail to document the
> NOTICE and LICENSE within the scope of source code they apply to.
>> Also, could someone point out where I could find the wording of  
>> the board's decision regarding the notice that all projects must  
>> carry?
> See special order 6C;
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2006/ 
> board_minutes_2006_05_24.txt

This was less discursive than the http://www.apache.org/legal/src- 
headers.html#notice document, and offers less guidance. In fact, the  

"     RESOLVED, that each release shall include a NOTICE file for
          such copyright notices and other notices required to accompany
          the distribution, "

doesn't clarify what "release" and "distribution" are supposed to mean.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message