www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <he...@yandell.org>
Subject Re: What constitutes a source release?
Date Wed, 01 May 2013 06:39:52 GMT
Taking a stab at the clear policy, I'd propose adding this to resolved.html:

"Source distributions must not contain binaries <quiet>(but let's not
discuss binaries that are not enforced like
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/icons/)</quiet>.
It's fine to have the user run a script to download binaries after they
have downloaded the source <quiet>(such as
download-binaries-from-svn-tag.sh, or perhaps when first running the
application)</quiet>. "

Either it's not clear to me, or the current policy is really just a vision
towards a policy.

Hen


On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:

> Would the language from the GPL be preferable?  See the first definition
> in section 1 of
> <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>.
>
> From the OSI Definition of the qualities of open-source software? See the
> last two sentences of section 2 at <http://opensource.org/osd>.
>
> This does not mean binary forms are excluded, so long as they *are* the
> primary maintainable forms.  In the case of images, modification might be
> by substitution or by editing with suitable tools, so long as that is the
> natural, direct, non-obfuscated way of handling such a case.
>
> It seems to me this is questioning of a policy of the ASF.  I think the
> policy is clear enough based on this thread.  It may be more effective to
> request an exception to policy, rather than struggle to lawyer around it.
>  I would give Roy's declaration on the subject serious weight before taking
> any other approach.
>
>  - Dennis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hyandell@gmail.com [mailto:hyandell@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Henri
> Yandell
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 18:13
> To: ASF Legal Discuss
> Subject: Re: What constitutes a source release?
>
> [ ... ]
>
> I don't see that the quote from the charter in Roy's old email limits us
> as much as he suggests. Community/Industry use of the phrase Open Source
> doesn't restrict it to only applying to source, and it covers what we
> create/maintain, not what we include. It would be unhealthy for us though
> to have a project releasing its core creativity in only binary form, so
> there's a lot of importance to the source-only point.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>

Mime
View raw message