Cleaning up a messy statement ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 09:38
> To: 'Commons Developers List' <dev@commons.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: [RNG] License text location(s) (Was: [jira] RNG-18 [...])
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gilles [mailto:gil...@harfang.homelinux.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 04:41
> > To: dev@commons.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [RNG] License text location(s) (Was: [jira] RNG-18 [...])
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:44:27 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> > > Le 22/09/2016 à 13:24, Gilles a écrit :
> > >
> > >> The fact is that we don't distribute the original code (in C)
> > >> but a Java port (that has undergone several transformations).
> > >
> > > That's still a derivative from the original code.
> >
> > Sure, but my point is that if release source then we already
> > comply with the author's request by copying their copyright
> > note in the Java source file.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >> It is confusing to read at times that "Apache only releases
> sources"
> > >> and
> > >> at other that we also release binaries...
> > >
> > > I agree, I understand this motto as "We don't have to release
> > > binaries
> > > if we don't want to".
> >
> > OK; in that case, we do release binaries and have to put another
> > copy of the copyright notice...
> [orcmid]
> 
> My understanding is that, for Apache, "release" is reserved for Source
> Code although <<http://apache.org/dev/release.html> although non-
> distributions are also producible and always built from a released
> source however.
[orcmid] 

Restated:

My understanding is that, for Apache, "release" always applies for source code, 
<http://apache.org/dev/release.html>.  Non-source distributions are also 
producible, but they are always built from a source release.  

> 
> Diligence with respect to IP in binaries that come as project
> distributions still applies, including handling of LICENSE and NOTICE,
> only this time specific to the distribution.  There may be more about
> that.
[orcmid] 

Also, stripping out other Category A information is a bit iffy.  The 
copyright-only Category A's do not include assertions about patents and Apache 
License Version 2.0 does.

> 
> >
> >
> > Gilles
> >
> > >
> > > Emmanuel Bourg
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to