Hi, > And from [3]: "Do not add anything to NOTICE which is not legally > required."
That correct but attribution IS legally required. Any license that requires attribution needs to be added to NOTICE. I checked with a member here at ApacheCon and they confirmed that is the case. > I wish I’d seen this sooner. Or did you already ask? I did point it out ages ago and asked if anyone had any objections - there were none. This content was actually in the previous release so it's not new and it has already been voted on and released. Most of the content on wikipedia was actually written by me (but not that that probably matters). > Or how about this alternative? Since you aren’t linking to text from > wikipedia and instead are copying text from wikipedia, how about we copy > text from blogs.apache.org/flex? Then we can avoid this whole > LICENSE/NOTICE issue completely. I probably won't have time to do that until after ApacheCon and I'm back in Australia. I'd suggest we release what we have now. As it already has been released so if it is in error we've already done that. Lets fix and rerelease if and when we have a clearer understanding on what should be done. As I said worse case is we have something extra in NOTICE and that is not a licensing error. There are many Apache project that has too much in NOTICE (ie MIT and BSD). Having something missing from NOTICE however is a licensing error. Also there are zero projects that depend on Tour De Flex having the extra content in NOTICE has zero effect even if it is not required. Thanks, Justin
