On 10/02/2010, at 8:49 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
> Question on Step 3:
> A software grant must be provided to the ASF. This grant can either be
> done by the ASF Corporate CLA (via Schedule B) or the traditional
> License Agreement. Acceptable methods of sending the grant to the ASF
> includes:
> snai
So as I understand it, the old copyright can exist in the NOTICES file
and that's ok in conjunction with the standard Apache license headers
& copyright?
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>> I think this will be
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> I think this will be promoted now, after the recent license header
> issues in another podling...
+1
once i have a minute, i planned to drawing up additional policy
- robert
---
I think this will be promoted now, after the recent license header
issues in another podling...
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> The IP Clearance form says:
>
> Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
> updated to reflect the new ASF co
2010/2/1 Grant Ingersoll :
> What exactly is the "new ASF copyright"? Is it our standard license header?
The header and, eventually, update the NOTICE file with third party attribution.
> Is it really a requirement of a grant before it's even committed? Can't
> this be something done during c
On 7/6/09 5:49 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Follow up question, I assume our vote to accept the contribution is still
acceptable as well as the software grant from Paremus. So, the only
necessary action is to have Paremus submit a n
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Follow up question, I assume our vote to accept the contribution is still
> acceptable as well as the software grant from Paremus. So, the only
> necessary action is to have Paremus submit a new, Apache compatible archive.
> Is that correct?
Follow up question, I assume our vote to accept the contribution is
still acceptable as well as the software grant from Paremus. So, the
only necessary action is to have Paremus submit a new, Apache compatible
archive. Is that correct?
-> richard
On 7/6/09 12:52 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Ok
Ok, thanks.
-> richard
On 7/6/09 12:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Richard S. Hall wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to perform IP clearance on the Sigil project to Felix.
The contributed archive contains some embedded JAR files, one of which
is covered by AGPL, which is a modified version o
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to perform IP clearance on the Sigil project to Felix.
>
> The contributed archive contains some embedded JAR files, one of which
> is covered by AGPL, which is a modified version of GPL. I am told by
> Paremus (the contributors) that only two minor
10 matches
Mail list logo
