Thanks for your quick answers. As for #4 - the pictures were taken by someone in our organization. I will tell him that they look professional -:) They are not licensed or anything, just personal photos
Since you seem to knowledgeable on License issues. You mentioned that #11 references Open Software Foundation. In my research this is managed by a GNU license. However, it looks Apache has restrictions on using these types of licenses - http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html. If this is true, would this mean we can't include this file in our source distribution? Roberta -----Original Message----- From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 5:51 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Trafodion (incubating) 1.3.0-incubating (RC4) Hi, > 1. HP donated the Trafodion code to Apache several months ago. We > have gone through all the legal steps to get the code donated. As > part of this process we removed all the HP copyrights except for our > test files and documentation. Do we have to remove all the Copyrights > in order to release in Apache? My understanding If the code was donated to the ASF it’s now copyright the ASF not HP. > Is including HP in the NOTICE/LICENSE file adequate? Yes that's needed as well. [1] > 2. A conscious decision was made to add the latest Apache license to > files that have existing licenses. So now multiple licenses are showing > up. Each file should have a single license header showing who owns the copyright. BTW rat doesn’t pick up on this. > The original license came when the code was first used by the product. If the code come from another project then HP probably didn't own the copyright. If the original code is Apache licensed then you usually don’t need to add anything to LICENSE [2], but if the software where it come from has a NOTICE file you may need to add something to your NOTICE files [2]. all other permissive licenses need to be added to LICENSE [3]. > 3. We have followed the instructions detailed in [8] but it looks like > we > are missing a mention of this in our README file. I’m not familiar with the process but you might want to look at what the HTTP project does in their README [2]. > 4. We do have permission to use the photos in [13] [14]. Is there > something we need to do to indicate this somewhere? >From the original people who took the photos? (Just because they were in the donation from HP doesn’t mean you have permission to use and distribute them.) Both of the photos look professional to me. How are they licensed? Does the photos metadata include license or copyright information? Usually that info would go in LICENSE. > 5. You mentioned that we may be too generous in excluding files for > our RAT test. Just because of the number of issues it may be that you’re not checking all the files you shod be. I didn’t look in detail. > 6. Justin, can we get accessibility to some of the scripts you ran to > check for these incompatibilities? Noting fancy script wise just rat and this: find . -type f -exec grep “XXX" {} \; -print Where XXX is “Copyright”, “ MIT “, “BSD”, “GPL” etc. Sometimes I pipe to a couple of grep -v ’s to reduce the noise. Thanks, Justin 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps 3. https://github.com/apache/httpd/blob/trunk/README --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
