www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject FW: [Repo][Proposal] NOT SO FAST ON CHANGING HEADERS
Date Sun, 28 Aug 2011 20:37:02 GMT


We have finally brought a large chunk of the OpenOffice.org code base over to the Apache SVN
under our incubator portion of the code tree.

There are still notices on those files, such as the one copied below.

We want to be careful in handling these files appropriately.  My questions are

 1. Can we replace these notices with the standard "Code Developed at Apache" header?

 2. Along with (1), should we create a NOTICE concerning the origin of the code?  (Suggested
wording would help).

 3. Is there anything else we should be doing that is in line with any particulars of the
SGA for this code?

We clearly can't handle this as third party code, because the license is not compatible.

 - Dennis

The current notice:
/*************************************************************************
 *
 * DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
 * 
 * Copyright 2000, 2010 Oracle and/or its affiliates.
 *
 * OpenOffice.org - a multi-platform office productivity suite
 *
 * This file is part of OpenOffice.org.
 *
 * OpenOffice.org is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License version 3
 * only, as published by the Free Software Foundation.
 *
 * OpenOffice.org is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
 * GNU Lesser General Public License version 3 for more details
 * (a copy is included in the LICENSE file that accompanied this code).
 *
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
 * version 3 along with OpenOffice.org.  If not, see
 * <http://www.openoffice.org/license.html>
 * for a copy of the LGPLv3 License.
 *
 ************************************************************************/

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orcmid@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 12:18
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: license-discuss@apache.org
Subject: RE: [Repo][Proposal] NOT SO FAST ON CHANGING HEADERS

Item (a, below) did not strike me as important until I saw it again while looking for the
information about the missing/problem files in the SVN import from Mercurial.

There are special rules for dealing with headers in third-party software and in software under
an SGA.  We need to follow those.

In particular, the general way that headers are changed in code under an SGA is by the contributor
changing them, because they have the right to do so as the copyright holder.

Since that has not been done, we need some guidance on what to do with the headers on the
current files.

My concern is that we need may need a modification of the DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE ... copyright
notice, and the license and disclaimer header, but we can't just paste the stock ALv2 "Code
Developed at the ASF" header and notice in its place.

See <http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html> for relevant information. (Note:
According to this material, we can replace or move the notices if Apache has written permission
to do so.  We need to be advised on what the actual case is and how to deal with it.  I.e.,
do we make NOTICE files, can we remove the in-header copyright notices, etc.)

 - Dennis

PS: I notice in the Podling Mentor guide that the Cryptography Audit must be done at once
(and should have been done before committing the code to SVN).  See the draft information
at <http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#bootstrap>.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephan Bergmann [mailto:stephan.bergmann.secondary@googlemail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 04:07
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Repo][Proposal]After the code is checked in to SVN

[ ... ]

Two more steps that we might want to phase in somewhere are:

(a) Replace the Oracle/LGPLv3 license headers in all the relevant files with Apache/AL2 ones.
 Is this maybe legally important to do as early as possible, or can it wait until end-of-incubation?
 Probably makes no sense to do before phase 5, anyway.

[ ... ]

-Stephan=


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


Mime
View raw message