Very good idea. I have done some research:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-124
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
So it looks like we are required to have the license in all files we
have in svn and also in each artifact we distribute. The only exemption
are very simple files with no creativity.
Still an archetype could strip that header when generating the effective
code. The problem is that we are then unsure what this means for the
user. If the resulting file contains
enough creativity then it may be copyrighted and may not be used without
a license (at least that is what I understood).
There seems to be no issue with a decision about generated code or
archetypes in the jira. So I have created an issue to get that resolved:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-141
Christian
Am 04.07.2012 11:05, schrieb Guillaume Nodet:
There's a mailing list specific for legal matters, there's no need to get
the board involved with that.
We should rather look for archives in legal-disc...@apache.org and in the
jira https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL
and if we can't find anything, raise a JIRA issue there.
My guts feeling is that is has already been discussed somewhere.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Christian Schneider <
ch...@die-schneider.net> wrote:
So my proposal is that I organize a statement from the board before our
next release and we already remove the license headers.
In the worst case I think we have to add a license file to the generated
code and in the best case we are fine.
Christian
Am 04.07.2012 10:30, schrieb Christian Schneider:
This is already a good tendency that generated code is unproblematic. To
make sure I propose we get a statement from the board then we are on the
safe side.
Perhaps this can then also be written down so other projects can simply
follow.
Christian
Am 04.07.2012 10:24, schrieb Rob Davies:
I think this thread is helpful - its from Eclipse -
http://www.eclipsezone.com/**eclipse/forums/t116081.html<http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t116081.html>
On 4 Jul 2012, at 09:19, Christian Schneider wrote:
My current understanding is that you can not assume you are allowed to
use code if it has no license. Is there an exception for generated/template
code?
If yes then I am supporting this but we should make sure this works
legally. Can we get some confirmation about this from some license
specialist from apache or is this written down somehere already?
Christian
Am 04.07.2012 10:12, schrieb Guillaume Nodet:
Generated code should not be licensed or copyrighted. It's up to the
user
to decide which license to use.
So +1 for removing any header from generated code.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi
When end users of Camel uses the Camel Maven Archetypes to create new
projects
http://camel.apache.org/camel-**maven-archetypes.html<http://camel.apache.org/camel-maven-archetypes.html>
Then we generate a new skeleton Maven project for them.
Currently these *generated* source files contains ASF license headers.
I want to discuss if we should remove these ASF headers from the
*generated* files.
Our end users works in organization that build software, and they may
not use any license headers,
or use their own license headers, or use another kind of header.
I think we should not include any license headers at all, and leave it
for the end users to decide for that.
Any thoughts?
--
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: cib...@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
