Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 09:22:11 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Henri Yandell (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12913448.1447707261000.147301.1448097731031@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12913448.1447707261000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12913448.1447707261000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12913448.1447707261711@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-229) Incorrect Wording at
 http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq ?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-229?page=3Dcom.atlassian.=
jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=3D15020=
351#comment-15020351 ]=20

Henri Yandell commented on LEGAL-229:
-------------------------------------

Agreed - seems like advice given for "we got a contribution with existing s=
ource header"; in which case any project would ask them to adjust said sour=
ce header. I think that FAQ item could be deleted.=20

I pondered if it was an old FAQ item from an age when individual's copyrigh=
ts were in Apache files, but looking at early httpd commits, they say Copyr=
ight The Apache Group.

> Incorrect Wording at http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq ?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-229
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-229
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Dennis E. Hamilton
>
> In this FAQ item,
> =E2=80=9CShould a Project Move Non-ASF Copyright Notices from Apache Sour=
ce Files to the Notice File?=E2=80=9D
>   =E2=80=9CNo.  If the copyright owner is still involved with the project=
,=20
>    they should move the notice themselves or permit us to do so.
>    If the owner cannot be found, the copyright notice should be
>    left as is, but the new licensing header should be added or
>    substituted for any existing Apache [sic] license header.=E2=80=9D=20
> This statement makes no sense if there is any existing Apache license hea=
der.  The topic is about Non-ASF Copyright Notices.
> Or is this inapplicable to the case of imported code under an SGA where t=
here are non-ASF copyright and non-Apache license notices?


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

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