Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 46F3817899 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:58:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 58301 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2015 14:58:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 58140 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2015 14:58:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 58130 invoked by uid 99); 24 Mar 2015 14:58:22 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:58:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of sandro.boehme@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) Received: from [212.227.17.21] (HELO mout.gmx.net) (212.227.17.21) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:57:57 +0000 Received: from sandro-bohmes-macbook-pro.fritz.box ([79.227.129.243]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LaaVn-1ZM5gb1J1j-00mICf for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:57:46 +0100 Message-ID: <55117B67.8060507@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:57:43 +0100 From: Sandro Boehme Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: legal-discuss@apache.org Subject: Re: Use of npm with the Artistic License 2.0 References: <550215C3.3030301@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <550215C3.3030301@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:UC6PqigP9N735aDSiXZdEd7B19rWo4Gt/WBI//CEGEI959J+0aE gGLlYzja5g2ieZkTE8gcDVvTcduBMGByX5FOYWrv64zWsuR6eWvpyO+QxPVnfa/bAkUdBD2 2/X2zl759Bb7oM9/ecsnimhj/Pe1Ej6/jjtpjSRksehZFKtAif3MQVDaG4LxLgecjKHcnlm 7WCzDek18DUQvLwwLtj6Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hello, this was a misunderstanding. In it's license npm refers to a package as a general software package. Not as an npm package in its registry. See Ians explaination here: http://apache-sling.73963.n3.nabble.com/License-question-tt4047956.html#a4048702 Thanks for the feedback anyways! Best, Sandro Am 12.03.15 um 23:40 schrieb Sandro Boehme: > Hello, > > regarding LEGAL-217 [1] I wonder when an npm user actually agrees to > distribute it's package under the npm license as well. > Looking at the documentation [2] a package developer only calls 'npm > publish' at his command line and it doesn't look like he agrees to let > the npm license apply to his work. Before he is able to do that he has > to add himself to as a user. I did that at the website and there I also > did not agree to let the npm license apply to work I could publish with > that account. > I think I should ask for clarification from the npm team by describing > my situation and ask them how they think their license should apply or not. > > What do you think? > > Best, > > Sandro > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-217 > [2] - https://docs.npmjs.com/misc/developers > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org