My free time has shortened again, for a while. I only occasionally come
home and check email. I hope my comments are not coming too late and will
be helpful anyways.
About multiple LICENSE: I did set it up this way having future PyPI
releases in mind and took care to ensure that the content is not in
conflict. I don't remember there be statement like "one LICENSE and
nothing else", but I assume sebb is right on that.
Dave suggested, that for PyPI we'll need to prepare some (presumably
automated) way to put individual LICENSE and NOTICE files. I think it
would be very difficult from engineering standpoint to split licenses like
that. Instead, I propose to treat Apache releases in a special way. That
is, remove per-package files from archive before releasing and not reflect
this in source tree. Source code repository, even with open access, is not
considered a distribution channel and is not required to follow release
guidelines. And building top-level LICENSE from per-package files can be
automated fairly easy.
About NOTICE: legal docs clearly state that for public domain code,
"Attribution is required (in a similar fashion to permissive licenses)"[1].
For what I know, public domain code isn't licensed - in fact, that's a
very important distinction. Thus, I read this as "in a similar fashion to
required attributions in permissive licenses". And these fall in category
of "required third-party notice"[2] - consider the last sentence/paragraph
- which belong in NOTICE.
Either sebb is wrong about NOTICE or legal guidelines are misleading, I
don't see third option.
[1]
http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#can-works-placed-in-the-public-domain-be-included-in-apache-products
[2] http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
