www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Amazon Software License compatibility
Date Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:15:09 GMT


> On Jun 20, 2016, at 10:43 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> All well and good to say that there is no Apache Software License, but common usage
is to use ASL to refer to the Apache License.
>> 
>> Decoding common usage was what I was doing here.
>> 
>> See for instance the first parenthetical on the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_License
> 
> Indeed.  That's an error, with respect to the current and defacto v 2.0.
> 
> "The Apache Software License, Version 1.1" is what misleads authors (which
> we need to disabuse, now that 1.1 is hardly common anymore).  This should
> be corrected whenever we trip over it.
> 
> "Apache License, Version 2.0" deliberately omitted the term "Software" to be
> more generally applicable to other works.
> 
> If you see "ASL" please, gently correct the author/page, rather than letting
> the mis-abbreviation persist (especially in light of other, actually abbrievated
> "ASL" licenses).
> 
> 

I'm not opposed to tangential threads, but hope a side thread won't derail the original subject...
;)

Probably worthy of a separate thread, but:

I've always followed what seems to be a convention of abbreviating the Apache License as ASLvx.x
(e.g "ASLv2", "ASLv1.1"). The emergence of the acronym "ASL" to refer to the Amazon Software
License (I plead guilty :) ) has the potential to create confusion confusion

Would it be worth documenting best practices wrt referring to the Apache License in an abbreviated
form?

I'd also like to gently urge a return to the subject at hand. I know of at least three ASF
projects that could benefit from a clear answer.

-Taylor
Mime
View raw message