legal-discuss@apache.org Archives

Re: [jira] Commented: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-23T18:06:47Z

Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Joe Schaefer (JIRA)  wrote:
>>    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=m.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId781020#action_12781020
]
>>
>> Joe Schaefer commented on LEGAL-58:
>> -----------------------------------
>>
>> Ping.  If it isn't possible to grant a specific exception to the LGPL
>> policy for this use-case, perhaps we can do something more limited
>> like make the LGPL code go away as a precondition for graduation
>> instead of a first release?
> 
> I'm OK with this....
> 
> Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the
> OCaml language, and there are parts of the OCaml distribution which
> are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to be modified and/or
> distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.
> 
> If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform
> dependency, i.e., those who are OK with OCaml would not have a problem
> with this.

+1

- robert


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

Re: about the legalization of script like ltmain.sh

2009-11-23T15:50:49Z

2009/11/22 Samuel Kevin :
> Thanks, Niclas. I get the idea.
> the following is the situation: we have such script like ltmain.sh, which
> includes GPL license declaration, in our project.
> and i find that in package of httpd, there's some script also has GPL
> license but i fail to find the GPLed script in SVN repos.
> so i wonder if:
> ������������������� such script can't be committed to SVN but can be packed
> in release package?
> if it can't be warpped in release package, do we need to apply a exception
> from GNU community so that we could continue the release?

I don't know about other scripts "like" ltmain.sh, but I do know about
ltmain.sh: this specific script, when generated by GNU Autotools, and
used for the purposes of aiding the building of the project in
question using gcc is OK to be committed to ASF SVN repositories.

http://tinyurl.com/ydlsclc

> regards,
> Kevin

- Sam Ruby

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

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-23T12:39:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12781382#action_12781382
] 

Sam Ruby edited comment on LEGAL-58 at 11/23/09 12:39 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------

I'm OK with this....

Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the OCaml language, and there
are parts of the OCaml distribution which are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to
be modified and/or distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.

If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform dependency, i.e., those who are
OK with OCaml would not have a problem with this.

Unless others see a problem I don't, this should be allowed, not only during incubation, but
also after graduation.

      was (Author: rubys):
    I'm OK with this....

Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the OCaml language, and there
are parts of the OCaml distribution which are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to
be modified and/or distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.

If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform dependency, i.e., those who are
OK with OCaml would not have a problem with this.

Unless others see a problem I don't, this should be allowed, not until during incubation,
but also after graduation.
  
> Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-58
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Joe Schaefer
>
> The Thrift project in the incubator has a few LGPL build files they'd like to distribute
> in their upcoming release:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/rb/setup.rb
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/ocaml/OCamlMakefile (trust
me it's LGPL).
> Any reason why they can't do it?  I don't see how this would harm any
> of our downstream users (closed source distributors don't need to distribute
> the build files, just the artifacts they create, which aren't touched by LGPL
> by any rational legal theory).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-23T12:31:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12781382#action_12781382
] 

Sam Ruby commented on LEGAL-58:
-------------------------------

I'm OK with this....

Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the OCaml language, and there
are parts of the OCaml distribution which are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to
be modified and/or distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.

If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform dependency, i.e., those who are
OK with OCaml would not have a problem with this.

Unless others see a problem I don't, this should be allowed, not until during incubation,
but also after graduation.

> Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-58
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Joe Schaefer
>
> The Thrift project in the incubator has a few LGPL build files they'd like to distribute
> in their upcoming release:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/rb/setup.rb
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/ocaml/OCamlMakefile (trust
me it's LGPL).
> Any reason why they can't do it?  I don't see how this would harm any
> of our downstream users (closed source distributors don't need to distribute
> the build files, just the artifacts they create, which aren't touched by LGPL
> by any rational legal theory).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

Re: [jira] Commented: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-23T04:07:24Z

It would probably be better if you updated the Jira instead of replying here.

On Nov 22, 2009, at 6:44 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Joe Schaefer (JIRA)  wrote:
>> 
>>    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12781020#action_12781020
]
>> 
>> Joe Schaefer commented on LEGAL-58:
>> -----------------------------------
>> 
>> Ping.  If it isn't possible to grant a specific exception to the LGPL
>> policy for this use-case, perhaps we can do something more limited
>> like make the LGPL code go away as a precondition for graduation
>> instead of a first release?
> 
> I'm OK with this....
> 
> Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the
> OCaml language, and there are parts of the OCaml distribution which
> are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to be modified and/or
> distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.
> 
> If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform
> dependency, i.e., those who are OK with OCaml would not have a problem
> with this.
> 
> - Sam Ruby
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Re: about the legalization of script like ltmain.sh

2009-11-23T03:14:13Z

Thanks, Niclas. I get the idea.
the following is the situation: we have such script like ltmain.sh, which
includes GPL license declaration, in our project.
and i find that in package of httpd, there's some script also has GPL
license but i fail to find the GPLed script in SVN repos.
so i wonder if:
                    such script can't be committed to SVN but can be packed
in release package?
if it can't be warpped in release package, do we need to apply a exception
from GNU community so that we could continue the release?

regards,
Kevin

2009/9/26 Niclas Hedhman 

>
> Another good thing to know about legal-discuss@ mailing list is that it is
> better to ask a question like "I have A,B,C and want to do X,Y,Z. Is that
> Ok?" instead of painting hypothetical questions...
>
> -- Niclas
>
> On Sep 26, 2009 8:22 AM, "Samuel Kevin"  wrote:
>
> hi��Sam:
>
> 2009/9/25 Sam Ruby  > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at
> 11:04 AM, Samuel Kevin   This sentence tiwists me........... i'd appriciate if you could show me an
> example for "under the same distribution terms that you use for the rest
> of that program". thanks
> regards,
> Kevin
>
>   > > - Sam Ruby > >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To
> unsu...
>
>
>
> --
>
> Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team    XJTU Shaanxi Province Key
> Lab. of Satellite and Te...
>
>


-- 
Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team    XJTU
Shaanxi Province Key Lab. of Satellite and Terrestrial Network Tech
http://incubator.apache.org/bluesky/

Re: [jira] Commented: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-23T02:44:25Z

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Joe Schaefer (JIRA)  wrote:
>
> � �[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12781020#action_12781020
]
>
> Joe Schaefer commented on LEGAL-58:
> -----------------------------------
>
> Ping. �If it isn't possible to grant a specific exception to the LGPL
> policy for this use-case, perhaps we can do something more limited
> like make the LGPL code go away as a precondition for graduation
> instead of a first release?

I'm OK with this....

Recapping my understanding: All or part of Thrift is written in the
OCaml language, and there are parts of the OCaml distribution which
are licensed under the LGPL which are intended to be modified and/or
distributed with OCaml sources, but are only used at build time.

If so, I'm comfortable treating this as a language/platform
dependency, i.e., those who are OK with OCaml would not have a problem
with this.

- Sam Ruby

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

[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-58) Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?

2009-11-21T17:58:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12781020#action_12781020
] 

Joe Schaefer commented on LEGAL-58:
-----------------------------------

Ping.  If it isn't possible to grant a specific exception to the LGPL
policy for this use-case, perhaps we can do something more limited
like make the LGPL code go away as a precondition for graduation
instead of a first release?

> Can Apache projects distribute build files that are LGPL?
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-58
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-58
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Joe Schaefer
>
> The Thrift project in the incubator has a few LGPL build files they'd like to distribute
> in their upcoming release:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/rb/setup.rb
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/thrift/trunk/lib/ocaml/OCamlMakefile (trust
me it's LGPL).
> Any reason why they can't do it?  I don't see how this would harm any
> of our downstream users (closed source distributors don't need to distribute
> the build files, just the artifacts they create, which aren't touched by LGPL
> by any rational legal theory).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

[DISCUSS] UK Enabling Bill For Copyright

2009-11-20T18:49:23Z

the UK is likely to move an enabling bill for copyright. if this passes
(as seems likely), copyright law will no longer be fixed statue but
variable regulations changeable quickly, without consultation or
publicity by officials. it will therefore be no longer be possible for
any English committer to know the current state of UK copyright law
(there are additional enforcement measures so it's likely that the first
knowledge you'll have of a change in the law will be when the new
copyright enforcement officials gain forced entry to your abode).
retrospective changes will also be possible.

will any changes be required to the ICLA if this legislation passes?

i'm thinking in particular about retrospectively copyright changes. how
is a US court likely to react?

- robert


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

svn commit: r882094 - in /infrastructure/site/trunk/docs: legal/ legal/drafts/ licenses/ licenses/exports/ licenses/proposed/

2009-11-19T10:29:51Z

Author: lehmi
Date: Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
New Revision: 882094

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=882094&view=rev
Log:
Added new TLP PDFBox

Modified:
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/3party.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/drafts/process-draft.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/index.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/ramblings.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/reports.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/resolved.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/src-headers.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/exports/index.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/index.html
    infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/proposed/index.html

Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/3party.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/3party.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/3party.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/3party.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -753,6 +753,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/drafts/process-draft.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/drafts/process-draft.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/drafts/process-draft.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/drafts/process-draft.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22
2009
@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/index.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/index.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/index.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/index.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/ramblings.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/ramblings.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/ramblings.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/ramblings.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -180,6 +180,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/reports.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/reports.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/reports.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/reports.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -2638,6 +2638,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/resolved.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/resolved.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/resolved.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/resolved.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -484,6 +484,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/src-headers.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/src-headers.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/src-headers.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/src-headers.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -387,6 +387,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22
2009
@@ -180,6 +180,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -352,6 +352,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/exports/index.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/exports/index.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/exports/index.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/exports/index.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22
2009
@@ -1089,6 +1089,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/index.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/index.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/index.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/index.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22 2009
@@ -277,6 +277,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals


Modified: infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/proposed/index.html
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/proposed/index.html?rev=882094&r1=882093&r2=882094&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/proposed/index.html [utf-8] (original)
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/proposed/index.html [utf-8] Thu Nov 19 10:17:22
2009
@@ -323,6 +323,7 @@
           OFBiz 
           OpenEJB 
           OpenJPA 
+          PDFBox 
           Perl

           POI 
           Portals




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

[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-65) storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository

2009-11-17T17:33:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12779002#action_12779002
] 

Craig Russell commented on LEGAL-65:
------------------------------------

I see no legal or social barriers to the project supplying a patch file to a third party component
that is then applied by a user.


> storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-65
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Brett Porter
>
> The Maven project would like to add a performance testing project that utilises an EPL
library, which is possible under the current policies. However, it is required to apply a
patch to the EPL library to use in this project. It is not intended to distribute the patched
EPL binary, or the EPL sources themselves, but to instruct the user of the project to check
out the EPL sources themselves and apply the supplied patch. 
> Is it acceptable to include the patch file in the Apache svn repository?
> [relevant thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/200911.mbox/%3cD9933C42-CBBC-4F66-9CA8-79A987BF658A@apache.org%3e]

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

Re: Request permission to adapt Contributor License Agreement for my open source project

2009-11-17T14:06:21Z

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:54 PM, nick@griffonsolutions.com
 wrote:
> Hello, I would like permission to use and adapt the Apache individual
> contributor license agreement form (http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt)
> for my project, Clockwork Web Framework (www.clockworkwf.com). This .NET web
> framework is licensed under Apache 2.0 and contains several other open
> source components (many also under Apache licensing). I notice that
> Twincling has already been granted this privilege
> (http://twincling.org/node/428). �I intend to modify it in the same way they
> have. The contributor license grant would be made to Griffon Solutions.
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please don�t hesitate to ask. I look
> forward to hearing from you,

Such usage is fine, as long as you don't make any statements that
imply that the ASF in any way endorses your specific project without
first involving the ASF PRC.

> Nick
>
> Nick Kellett
>
> CEO / Co-Founder, Griffon Solutions
> Email: nick@griffonsolutions.com
> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicholaskellett
> Twitter: @NickKellett or www.twitter.com/nickkellett

- Sam Ruby

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

[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-65) storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository

2009-11-17T08:22:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12778767#action_12778767
] 

Brett Porter commented on LEGAL-65:
-----------------------------------

yes, temporary until applied upstream, though it was noted that it may take a Very Long Time
for such a thing to occur - so it could be a fairly permanent fixture

> storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-65
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Brett Porter
>
> The Maven project would like to add a performance testing project that utilises an EPL
library, which is possible under the current policies. However, it is required to apply a
patch to the EPL library to use in this project. It is not intended to distribute the patched
EPL binary, or the EPL sources themselves, but to instruct the user of the project to check
out the EPL sources themselves and apply the supplied patch. 
> Is it acceptable to include the patch file in the Apache svn repository?
> [relevant thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/200911.mbox/%3cD9933C42-CBBC-4F66-9CA8-79A987BF658A@apache.org%3e]

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-65) storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository

2009-11-17T07:31:39Z


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12778750#action_12778750
] 

Henri Yandell commented on LEGAL-65:
------------------------------------

Seems fine to me. Could be used as a how-to for needing to modify a 3rd party category B dependency.

Is this temporary until the patch is applied upstream?

> storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-65
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Brett Porter
>
> The Maven project would like to add a performance testing project that utilises an EPL
library, which is possible under the current policies. However, it is required to apply a
patch to the EPL library to use in this project. It is not intended to distribute the patched
EPL binary, or the EPL sources themselves, but to instruct the user of the project to check
out the EPL sources themselves and apply the supplied patch. 
> Is it acceptable to include the patch file in the Apache svn repository?
> [relevant thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/200911.mbox/%3cD9933C42-CBBC-4F66-9CA8-79A987BF658A@apache.org%3e]

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

Re: Returned post for legal-archive@apache.org

2009-11-16T19:30:17Z

An error occured while fetching this message, sorry !

Re: ICLA policy for those under 18

2009-11-16T17:53:00Z

William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> That is ideal. 
Thanks for the quick response!  This might be a good topic to add to
http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html at some point, especially with 
Apache involvement in GHOP.

Kathey


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

Fwd: Returned post for legal-archive@apache.org

2009-11-16T17:38:46Z

Hi Folks-
Before submitting code to the Apache SVN, our podling (Traffic Serer) 
followed the crypto export control instructions here
http://apache.org/dev/crypto.html
We just got this automated message in return, suggesting that either a) 
the instructions/process are wrong, b)the instructions should be updated 
to state that the automated message will be delivered a few weeks/months 
after the submission (or c-- both).

miles


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Returned post for legal-archive@apache.org
Date: 	Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:53:02 -0800
From: 	legal-archive-help@apache.org 
To: 	mlibbey@apache.org 



Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
legal-archive@legal-archive mailing list.

I'm sorry, the list moderators for the legal-archive list
have failed to act on your post. Thus, I'm returning it to you.
If you feel that this is in error, please repost the message
or contact a list moderator directly.

--- Enclosed, please find the message you sent.

Re: ICLA policy for those under 18

2009-11-16T15:49:57Z

Kathey Marsden wrote:
> Hello legal-discuss,
> 
> I was wondering. What is the ICLA policy for teenagers?   Should both
> teen and parent sign and should the contributors age be indicated?

That is ideal.  The information on the ICLA is confidential; that information
is available only internally within the ASF records.


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

ICLA policy for those under 18

2009-11-16T14:31:25Z

Hello legal-discuss,

I was wondering. What is the ICLA policy for teenagers?   Should both 
teen and parent sign and should the contributors age be indicated?

Thanks

Kathey Marsden


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

spam bounces

2009-11-16T11:20:02Z

... I've added them to the deny list so it should stop.

- Brett

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

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:15:20Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:14:00 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:14:00Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:13:00 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:13:00Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:12:00 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:12:00Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:11:09 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:11:09Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:10:19 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:10:19Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:09:29 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:09:29Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:08:44 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:08:44Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:07:59 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:07:59Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: 
��        : MDaemon@webtraffickings.com
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:07:09 +0300
���� : No valid command found

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

[jira] Created: (LEGAL-65) storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository

2009-11-16T11:07:39Z

storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository
-------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: LEGAL-65
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-65
             Project: Legal Discuss
          Issue Type: Question
            Reporter: Brett Porter


The Maven project would like to add a performance testing project that utilises an EPL library,
which is possible under the current policies. However, it is required to apply a patch to
the EPL library to use in this project. It is not intended to distribute the patched EPL binary,
or the EPL sources themselves, but to instruct the user of the project to check out the EPL
sources themselves and apply the supplied patch. 

Is it acceptable to include the patch file in the Apache svn repository?

[relevant thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/200911.mbox/%3cD9933C42-CBBC-4F66-9CA8-79A987BF658A@apache.org%3e]

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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

No valid command found

2009-11-16T11:07:09Z

���� ������ ��� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com �� �������� ������ ��� ��������� ������ ��������
��������.  ������� �������� �� ���������.  ����� �������� �������� � ��������� ��������, ���������
������ �� ����� MDaemon@webtraffickings.com � ������ ����� ���� � ������ "HELP" � ���� ������.
 (����� ������� ����� ������, ����� �������� �� ������ )

Message-ID: <415226168.1258369659607.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
��        : jira@apache.org
����     : legal-discuss@apache.org
����      : Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
���� : [jira] Created: (LEGAL-65) storing a patch to an EPL library in the svn repository

(�������� ��������� ����������� � ���� ��������)

Request permission to adapt Contributor License Agreement for my open source project

2009-11-11T22:54:34Z

Hello, I would like permission to use and adapt the Apache individual contributor license agreement
form (http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt) for my project, Clockwork Web Framework (www.clockworkwf.com).
This .NET web framework is licensed under Apache 2.0 and contains several other open source
components (many also under Apache licensing). I notice that Twincling has already been granted
this privilege (http://twincling.org/node/428).  I intend to modify it in the same way they
have. The contributor license grant would be made to Griffon Solutions.

If you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to ask. I look forward to hearing
from you,

Nick

Nick Kellett
CEO / Co-Founder, Griffon Solutions
Email: nick@griffonsolutions.com
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicholaskellett
Twitter: @NickKellett or www.twitter.com/nickkellett

Re: legal page

2009-11-11T20:56:10Z

On Wed 11 Nov 2009 12:05, Ralph Goers  wrote:

> On Nov 11, 2009, at 8:44 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> 
>> I still don't follow - what are you seeing, and what appears to be wrong?
>> 
>
> It appears to be fine now. When the issue was first raised you could
> go to www.apache.org and click on "legal affairs". I don't recall
> whether I got a 404 but it was some sort of error from the httpd
> server.

I saw the same thing during apachecon.  The legal-affairs/index.html
file was missing and you got a directory listing.

-- 
   J. Aaron Farr
   馮傑仁
   www.cubiclemuses.com

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

Re: legal page

2009-11-11T17:05:26Z

On Nov 11, 2009, at 8:44 AM, sebb wrote:

> 
> I still don't follow - what are you seeing, and what appears to be wrong?
> 

It appears to be fine now. When the issue was first raised you could go to www.apache.org
and click on "legal affairs". I don't recall whether I got a 404 but it was some sort of error
from the httpd server.

Ralph

Re: legal page

2009-11-11T16:44:57Z

On 07/11/2009, Sam Ruby  wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM, sebb  wrote:
>  > On 07/11/2009, Sam Ruby  wrote:
>  >> Anybody know why http://www.apache.org/legal/ doesn't match
>  >>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/foundation/legal ?
>  >
>  > Because the latter is "private"?
>  >
>  > The source for
>  >
>  > http://www.apache.org/legal/ is
>  >
>  > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk
>  >
>  >>  The content on people.apache.org in /www/www.apache.org/legal is correct.
>
>
> I got the URI wrong (hastily done at an airport), but the question
>  still remains...
>
>  From /www/www.apache.org/legal/ on people.apache org:
>
>  $ls
>  3party.html             ramblings.html          src-headers.html
>  drafts                  reports.html
>  index.html              resolved.html
>
>  $svn info
>  Path: .
>  URL: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal
>  Repository Root: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf
>  Repository UUID: 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
>  Revision: 833674
>  Node Kind: directory
>  Schedule: normal
>  Last Changed Author: sebb
>  Last Changed Rev: 829110
>  Last Changed Date: 2009-10-23 15:58:27 +0000 (Fri, 23 Oct 2009)

And in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal/
I see the same files.

# 3party.html
# drafts/
# index.html
# ramblings.html
# reports.html
# resolved.html
# src-headers.html

>  Neither what I see on p.a.o, nor what I see in
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/legal
>  match what is being served at the moment.  Looking at Google's cache,
>  this content used to be correct.
>
>  What's up?
>

I still don't follow - what are you seeing, and what appears to be wrong?

>  - Sam Ruby
>
>
>  >>  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>  >>  From: Ralph Goers 
>  >>  Date: Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:01 AM
>  >>  Subject: legal page
>  >>  To: Legal Discuss 
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>  What happened to the legal affairs pages? The link on the main site is
>  >>  pretty broken.
>  >>
>  >>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >>  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

Re: dependencies on third party software

2009-11-11T15:42:37Z

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday November 10, 2009, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2009, at 8:13 AM, Josh Thompson wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Ralph,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback - more discussion inline.
> >
> > On Wednesday November 04, 2009, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >> Usual qualifications - I am not on the legal committee so this is
> >> just
> >> my personal opinion.
> >>
> >> On Nov 4, 2009, at 10:06 AM, Josh Thompson wrote:
> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>
> >>> Bump.
> >>>
> >>> Anyone?
> >>>
> >>> On Thursday October 29, 2009, Josh Thompson wrote:
> >>>> Legal advisers,
> >>>>
> >>>> We at the Apache VCL project are trying to get our first release
> >>>> out.  VCL
> >>>> is a cloud management framework.  It is written in perl and php.
> >>>>
> >>>> While there is no third party software bundled with VCL, there are
> >>>> two
> >>>> types of third party software dependencies we have questions about.
> >>>>
> >>>> The first, required perl modules, may not even be considered third
> >>>> party.
> >>>> For the perl code, we have a script that will install all required
> >>>> additional perl modules.  There's about 14 such modules (with the
> >>>> possibility that some of them may already be installed).  Most of
> >>>> those
> >>>> modules say they are licensed under the same terms as perl itself.
> >>>> A few
> >>>> of them explicitly state they are licensed under one of "Artistic
> >>>> License",
> >>>> GPL, or LGPL.  How should we go about listing these licenses?
> >>>> Should they
> >>>> be listed out in the README file, the NOTICE file, or somewhere
> >>>> else?  The
> >>>> script that installs them displays a message stating that it will
> >>>> install
> >>>> some items licensed under "Artistic License", GPL, and LGPL and
> >>>> requires
> >>>> that you type YES to proceed with installing them.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html should provide the
> >> answers to where the attributions should appear. I like that you have
> >> a script to install them.
> >>
> >> My biggest concern is the one you didn't ask about. ASF policy is
> >> that
> >> you can't have a required dependency on something with a category X
> >> license (see http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x),
> >> so
> >> you cannot distribute VCL until all the dependencies on these are
> >> optional or are replaced with something with a compatible license. I
> >> am also concerned with the GPL dependencies because of the FSF's
> >> definition of what a derivative work is. If you have a required
> >> dependency on something with a GPL license your code must also be
> >> licensed under the GPL, not the Apace license (which is why it isn't
> >> allowed).
> >
> > There's one part of VCL (notifications via Jabber) that's not really
> > used that
> > is the cause of a chunk of the additional perl modules.  We'll
> > remove that
> > and see if there are any modules left that are not released under
> > perl's
> > license.
> >
> > However, even given that, since the code is written in perl and PHP,
> > those
> > interpreters are required to run VCL.  PHP's license is listed as
> > okay on the
> > page you linked to above.  perl is released under the Artistic
> > License, which
> > is not listed on that page at all.
> >
> > Is ASF okay with the Artistic License?  If not, things are looking
> > pretty
> > bleak for our project...
> >
> >>>> The second type of third party software depends on how you want to
> >>>> use VCL.
> >>>> VCL can manage physical machines using xCAT (which must be set up
> >>>> separately and is outside the scope of installing VCL), or VCL can
> >>>> manage
> >>>> VMWare based systems, with other hypervisors to be added in later.
> >>>> Also,
> >>>> there is some experimental work being done to support intelligent
> >>>> storage,
> >>>> starting with NetApp filers.  Here's where things get a little more
> >>>> complicated.  If using xCAT to deploy linux on any hardware, or to
> >>>> deploy
> >>>> windows on identical hardware, there is no third party software
> >>>> required
> >>>> (other than the perl modules already discussed).  However, if
> >>>> deploying
> >>>> windows to different types of hardware, you must download Sysprep
> >>>> from
> >>>> Microsoft, along with any drivers to support the different types of
> >>>> hardware.
> >>>>
> >>>> If using VCL to manage VMWare systems, you need VMWare's perl
> >>>> libraries.
> >>>> Similarly, if managing a NetApp filer, you need NetApp's perl
> >>>> libraries.
> >>>>
> >>>> How do we need to list out/explain these dependencies?
> >>
> >> Dependencies required for a specific platform are generally OK.  See
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#platform . This doesn't
> >> document
> >> how to explain them. I would presume this
> >> should go in the NOTICE file.
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >
> > Okay - we'll list them in the NOTICE file.
>
> Josh, just so we are on the same page in terms of what still needs to
> be done, can you create Jira issues that list what needs to be done on
> this front for the release?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan

I've created VCL-264 to list what needs to be done.

Andy pointed out the "System Requirements" section a little more than halfway 
down this page:

http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html

Based on that, we're restating that all of the perl and mysql requirements 
are "System Requirements".  That will handle the bits that are GPL/LGPL 
licensed.

Josh

- -- 
- -------------------------------
Josh Thompson
Systems Programmer
Advanced Computing | VCL Developer
North Carolina State University

Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
919-515-5323

my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFK+ttuV/LQcNdtPQMRAmITAJ4+pF+4rCGG1d5BAP31jsYxJ+8TkACfZ3BO
cGmO8lIVqoDxaAb7imRnSyg=
=TlUX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Re: dependencies on third party software

2009-11-10T13:48:54Z


On Nov 5, 2009, at 8:13 AM, Josh Thompson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ralph,
>
> Thanks for the feedback - more discussion inline.
>
> On Wednesday November 04, 2009, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> Usual qualifications - I am not on the legal committee so this is  
>> just
>> my personal opinion.
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2009, at 10:06 AM, Josh Thompson wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Bump.
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>>
>>> On Thursday October 29, 2009, Josh Thompson wrote:
>>>> Legal advisers,
>>>>
>>>> We at the Apache VCL project are trying to get our first release
>>>> out.  VCL
>>>> is a cloud management framework.  It is written in perl and php.
>>>>
>>>> While there is no third party software bundled with VCL, there are
>>>> two
>>>> types of third party software dependencies we have questions about.
>>>>
>>>> The first, required perl modules, may not even be considered third
>>>> party.
>>>> For the perl code, we have a script that will install all required
>>>> additional perl modules.  There's about 14 such modules (with the
>>>> possibility that some of them may already be installed).  Most of
>>>> those
>>>> modules say they are licensed under the same terms as perl itself.
>>>> A few
>>>> of them explicitly state they are licensed under one of "Artistic
>>>> License",
>>>> GPL, or LGPL.  How should we go about listing these licenses?
>>>> Should they
>>>> be listed out in the README file, the NOTICE file, or somewhere
>>>> else?  The
>>>> script that installs them displays a message stating that it will
>>>> install
>>>> some items licensed under "Artistic License", GPL, and LGPL and
>>>> requires
>>>> that you type YES to proceed with installing them.
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html should provide the
>> answers to where the attributions should appear. I like that you have
>> a script to install them.
>>
>> My biggest concern is the one you didn't ask about. ASF policy is  
>> that
>> you can't have a required dependency on something with a category X
>> license (see http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x),  
>> so
>> you cannot distribute VCL until all the dependencies on these are
>> optional or are replaced with something with a compatible license. I
>> am also concerned with the GPL dependencies because of the FSF's
>> definition of what a derivative work is. If you have a required
>> dependency on something with a GPL license your code must also be
>> licensed under the GPL, not the Apace license (which is why it isn't
>> allowed).
>
> There's one part of VCL (notifications via Jabber) that's not really  
> used that
> is the cause of a chunk of the additional perl modules.  We'll  
> remove that
> and see if there are any modules left that are not released under  
> perl's
> license.
>
> However, even given that, since the code is written in perl and PHP,  
> those
> interpreters are required to run VCL.  PHP's license is listed as  
> okay on the
> page you linked to above.  perl is released under the Artistic  
> License, which
> is not listed on that page at all.
>
> Is ASF okay with the Artistic License?  If not, things are looking  
> pretty
> bleak for our project...
>
>>>> The second type of third party software depends on how you want to
>>>> use VCL.
>>>> VCL can manage physical machines using xCAT (which must be set up
>>>> separately and is outside the scope of installing VCL), or VCL can
>>>> manage
>>>> VMWare based systems, with other hypervisors to be added in later.
>>>> Also,
>>>> there is some experimental work being done to support intelligent
>>>> storage,
>>>> starting with NetApp filers.  Here's where things get a little more
>>>> complicated.  If using xCAT to deploy linux on any hardware, or to
>>>> deploy
>>>> windows on identical hardware, there is no third party software
>>>> required
>>>> (other than the perl modules already discussed).  However, if
>>>> deploying
>>>> windows to different types of hardware, you must download Sysprep
>>>> from
>>>> Microsoft, along with any drivers to support the different types of
>>>> hardware.
>>>>
>>>> If using VCL to manage VMWare systems, you need VMWare's perl
>>>> libraries.
>>>> Similarly, if managing a NetApp filer, you need NetApp's perl
>>>> libraries.
>>>>
>>>> How do we need to list out/explain these dependencies?
>>
>> Dependencies required for a specific platform are generally OK.  See
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#platform . This doesn't  
>> document
>> how to explain them. I would presume this
>> should go in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> Ralph
>
> Okay - we'll list them in the NOTICE file.
>

Josh, just so we are on the same page in terms of what still needs to  
be done, can you create Jira issues that list what needs to be done on  
this front for the release?


Regards,
Alan


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

Re: Redistributing Data

2009-11-09T14:34:31Z

On Nov 8, 2009, at 11:14 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:

>> I figure we could just put up a page saying,
>> "If you don't wish to have your content in this archive, please send
>> an email to our user list and it will be removed"
>
> While the statement is probably true, I wouldn't have ASF commit to  
> it. Let
> us leave no illusions that we're administratively prepared to  
> respond to
> requests to remove content from our archives or to monitor the  
> content of
> our archives for infringing content. Only if someone can present a
> compelling case that we've done something wrong will we respond to  
> such
> requests.

Sorry, I think we lost a bit of context in that statement.  The  
archive in question is a specific tarball of a web crawl or other  
dataset that the Open Relevance project would be maintaining, as  
opposed to the general ASF mail archives or other things.  The burden  
for removal is much lower (untar, find offending item and remove.) 

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

RE: Redistributing Data

2009-11-09T04:14:11Z

> I figure we could just put up a page saying,
> "If you don't wish to have your content in this archive, please send
> an email to our user list and it will be removed"

While the statement is probably true, I wouldn't have ASF commit to it. Let
us leave no illusions that we're administratively prepared to respond to
requests to remove content from our archives or to monitor the content of
our archives for infringing content. Only if someone can present a
compelling case that we've done something wrong will we respond to such
requests. 

/Larry



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:02 PM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Redistributing Data
> 
> > [LR: ] First, we apologize profusely and promise never to do it
> > again. Then
> > we remind everyone that we have no budget to pay damages. Then we
> > cry. Don't
> > you have kids who make mistakes?
> >
> > Please don't ask me to help write/review another "policy" document
> > right
> > now.
> 
> That sounds good to me.  I figure we could just put up a page saying,
> "If you don't wish to have your content in this archive, please send
> an email to our user list and it will be removed"
> 
> -Grant
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Re: Redistributing Data

2009-11-09T03:01:43Z

> [LR: ] First, we apologize profusely and promise never to do it  
> again. Then
> we remind everyone that we have no budget to pay damages. Then we  
> cry. Don't
> you have kids who make mistakes?
>
> Please don't ask me to help write/review another "policy" document  
> right
> now.

That sounds good to me.  I figure we could just put up a page saying,  
"If you don't wish to have your content in this archive, please send  
an email to our user list and it will be removed"

-Grant

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