www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament"<johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Adding non-ASF licensing headers to an Incubating project code base
Date Thu, 08 Sep 2016 21:12:48 GMT


On 2016-09-07 20:50 (-0400), Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org> wrote: 
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:38 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> > Apologies for the really late response on this, but wanted to get more insight.
> >
> > I'm a little puzzled why we have BSD licensed code in an Apache project.  Was there
an SGA executed for MADLib to convert it to Apache License?
> 
> There was SGA executed on the changes that Pivotal owned. For the rest -- BSD
> license is a Cat A license and the BSD licensed code can exist in an ASF
> project without a need for an explicit re-licensing:
>     http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.


Just to clarify - there is no SGA on file for MADLib.  I'd like to understand if we expect
one.  An issue Roman pointed out is that not all contributors were able to provide an OK to
relicense.

If I compare this to groovy, for instance, we did not require all contributors to execute
a SGA.

> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


Mime
View raw message