Hi, > And sure, the image labeled with B and C is based on the non-labeled image > with smiley faces, so I'll concede that image, and even the exact network it > represents, may fall under CC-BY-SA, and thus it was correct to remove the > old code.
This main issue I think as the old code wasn’t replaced but modified. Modified stuff in general keeps the same license the original. That may apply here, but I’m not 100% sure, but I don’t think it a serious issue. But given there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? Also other IPMC members can still vote +1 and this become a release, but I suggest the project fixes it in a future release. If you had used teh WIP progress disclaimer I would have votes +1 and suggested that. > Are you asserting that any directed graph is CC-BY-SA licensed? If not, what > is the threshold for difference that you would accept? I would assume not, but you'd need to get actually legal advice to regards what the threshold would be. As is every user of this software may need to seek that advice in order to use it without that risk. The risk could be minimal or nonexistent, but IANAL it's best IMO to err on the side of caution with stuff like this. > Would it be acceptable to generate a completely random graph using [1] and > represent that in the code? Sure, but so would one that the project came up with itself that wasn’t based on another one, or one that was under compatible license. Kind Regards, Justin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
