www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tobias Schlitt <tob...@schlitt.info>
Subject Re: License changes for Zeta (incubating)
Date Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:52:11 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sam,

On 07/28/2010 08:06 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Tobias Schlitt <tobias@schlitt.info> wrote:

>> I'm on fixing license headers and stuff for the Zeta Components project
>> and want to re-confirm that I got everything right. The Zeta project has
>> been developed under the hood of eZ Systems AS (http://ez.no) previously
>> and code drop was signed last week.
>>
>> - From http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html I understand that we
>> now process as follows:
>>
>> - - Remove all copyright notices from source files
>> - - Add Apache License 2.0 header to every source file
>> - - Add a NOTICE file that notices the copyright of eZ Systems
>>
>> Is that the correct procedure? Or do we need to follow the steps for
>> "Treatment of Third-Party Works" and keep the current copyright info
>> inside the source files?

> Mostly, these types of questions are handled in the incubator.  As I
> see it, the question comes down to whether eZ Systems is actively
> participating (i.e., one of the first two parties), or if somebody
> else (one of the first two parties) is committing (appropriately
> licensed) code from eZ Systems without their knowledge or involvement
> (i.e., as a third party).

eZ Systems signed the code drop and provided an SVN export, which has
been imported. So, basically eZ has actively participated. The company
will also participate in future development.

So, basically, eZ belongs to the first two parties and we should follow
the procedure described above. Right?

> In general, retention of statements of ownership is something the ASF
> discourages but does not forbid.  In many cases, it has been found to
> inhibit the formation of a community.  When possible, it is preferred
> that such acknowledgements be moved, by the owners of the copyright,
> to the NOTICE file.

We would like having eZ attributed as the original creator of the code.
However, I don't think it's necessary to have them listed in each source
file. Is this a decision eZ must take or can we as project decide on how
we handle copyright notices.

Regards,
Toby
- -- 
Tobias Schlitt         tobias@schlitt.info       GPG Key: 0xC462BC14
a passion for php                     http://schlitt.info/opensource
eZ Components are Zeta Components now!          http://bit.ly/9S7zbn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkxQimsACgkQ5bO3TcRivBSldACfS1KjGbAUYpSpOMeoIb/OVPuy
E7UAoI1qsDWTYH3j7jhGkDikDtbv+thv
=Fym7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message