www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noah Slater (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-114) License Header - Short Form?
Date Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:14:48 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13708390#comment-13708390
] 

Noah Slater commented on LEGAL-114:
-----------------------------------

Well, I think it's important to clarify what we (i.e. the ASF, or the legal-discuss folks)
mean in this ticket.

If we're talking about standalone files that are intended for distribution outside of a release,
then "Licensed to the public under the Apache License 2.0." probably isn't going to cut it.
The file has no copyright attribution at all, nor any "parent" attribution, as is the case
for files in a release.

What exactly is the use case here? Why would we ever be distributing single files?

The original ticket, in my understanding, was about small files *within* a release, where
the existing boilerplate is unwieldy. If someone takes a release, and takes one of those files,
and distributes it separately, exactly the same rules would apply as if they took any other
file and distributed it separately. (i.e. They would have to figure out how to attribute copyright
themselves. This a can of worms, obviously, as we don't actually indicate the copyright of
individual files. So either they would have to figure it out themselves, or just blanket attribute
copyright to the ASF. Which may or may not be accurate.)

I note that there is nothing in our existing boilerplate that indicates what higher-level
notice applies, or even what release the file is included in. So existing release files can
be shared between releases, between projects and so on. The use case is the same here. Except,
we would never release a file with our standard boilerplate *by itself*.

I think we should stay focused on the use case of having a short form boilerplate to apply
to files that are *include in a release*. There is no precedent that I know of, of distributing
individual files. To me that seems like a separate matter, and if we try to address it here,
it is only going to muddy the issue.


                
> License Header - Short Form?
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-114
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-114
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Roger Meier
>
> Hi all
> Today the license headers within files does need ~ 15 lines within a file.
> This needs lot of space at the top of a file, probably too much if you have a small README
file. 
> e.g. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/thrift/trunk/tutorial/README?view=markup
> Is it possible to use a smaller header reflecting the license terms within a source or
README file?
> Can we use something like that one or a shorter one?
> {noformat}
> /*
>  * Copyright (c) The Apache Software Foundation
>  * Licensed to the ASF under one or more contributor license agreements
>  * (see NOTICE file distributed with this work). ASF licenses this file to you
>  * under the following license http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>  * Software distributed is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES
>  * OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
>  */
> {noformat}
> Should we mention also the License identifier (Apache-2.0) used within spdx standard?
> see http://spdx.org/licenses/
> Thanks,
> Roger

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

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


Mime
View raw message