www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
Subject Re: Is GitHub forking subject to clause 4b?
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2017 00:02:38 GMT
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org> wrote:
> I've committed in CMS two new suggested entries to add to the FAQ
> about Prominent Notices, intended for
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html
>
> As there was no clear way to fork (!) the www.apache.org site in CMS
> commits and this shouldn't go straight live before Legal agrees, I
> used HTML comments as safeguards, so it does not show up on the
> staging build. Use https://cms.apache.org/www/ to  modify the text and
> comment in this thread.  (Remember the notorious "Update" button
> first)
>
> Comments welcome!
>
>
>
> ---------------
>
> ## How do I provide a "prominent notice" if I modify Apache source
> code? ## {#Prominent-Notice}
>
> The Apache License 2.0 [clause 4b](/licenses/LICENSE-2.0#redistribution) permits
> you to distribute Apache source code with your own modifications, provided that:
>
>> 4b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You
changed the files
>
> The easiest way to add a _prominent notice_ for your modifications
> is to amend the [license header](/legal/src-headers.html) at the top of the
> source code file and add a separate comment immediately above or below
> the existing
> license header.
>
> For instance, if Example Corporation has modified a file from Apache Foo:
>
>
>     /**
>      * Adapted from Apache Foo 1.2.3 http://foo.apache.org/
>      * Modifications Copyright 2015-2016 Example Corporation
>      */
>     /**
>      * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
>      * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
>      * distributed with this work for additional information
>      * ...
>
>
> As exemplified above, you are recommended (but not required)
> to also include a reference to which Apache release the file
> was adapted from.
>
> Note that derivative work (e.g. compiled binaries) do not need to carry a
> prominent notice of your changes, however as you are required to
> [redistribute any NOTICE file](/licenses/LICENSE-2.0#redistribution)
> (clause 4d),
> you may want to also amend the NOTICE file
> to include the copyright of your modifications.
>
>
> ---------------
>
>
> ## Does forking Apache code require prominent notices? ## {#Forking}
>
> In general, _forking_ Apache code, e.g. publishing your own source
> code repository with
> modified Apache code, is
> [considered](https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6ce8ebd903c826a292b6ed3d65776fefebff926ffbf23266b65d317d@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E)
>  a form of
> [redistribution]([clause 4b](/licenses/LICENSE-2.0#redistribution)
> and therefore require any Apache files you modify to include a
> [prominent notice](#Prominent-Notice).
>
> The Apache Software Foundation do however recognise that open source
> development can be
> performed in distributed collaboration,
> including [GitHub pull
> requests](https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-requests/) and
> public personal branches of version management systems like Git and
> Mercurial, and that
> distributing such contributions publicly is a side-effect of open development.
>

I'm +1 on all of the above, however stuff bellow I have a LOT of questions on:

> We therefore consider a forked repository which includes modified Apache code
> to sufficiently carry a _prominent notice_ if:
>
> a) The repository clearly shows which files have been modified (e.g.
> prominently showing "Latest commit")

I really don't understand what this means.

> b) The repository clearly shows its origin from ASF (e.g. prominently
> showing "Forked from apache/foo")

I think I sort of understand what you're trying to say, but it only applies
to GH and it only applies to 1st degree forks. Seems to be unlear.

> c) The repository is **not** intended for redistribution, e.g.
> additional release tags or custom installation instructions

What is a "release tag" ? How is a different from a Git/SVN random tag?

> d) The modifications are clearly experimental or intended for
> contribution to the Apache Software Foundation.

What is "experimental"?

Thanks,
Roman.

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


Mime
View raw message