On 9/20/16, 4:12 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>> Remember that a senior Apache member recommended filing an
>> upstream issue in this email .
>That refers to a missing NOTICE file which is a different issue, how
>notice files are handled is ASF policy and 3rd parties don’t need to
>follow that. That's not to do with complying with the terms of a 3rd
>party license which applies to everyone (including us).
I will ask on legal discuss whether he was addressing this particular
scenario or any third-party with documentation issues. That might help
determine which path we should follow.
>> Given that the source header policy  says not to modify third-party
>> headers, it seems odd to be modifying a third-party license file.
>Policy is not to remove or modify existing copyright or licenses (point
>1). Modify here would refer to changing the terms of the license.
>Including the full text of the 3rd party license could be done but it
>this case it would be a documentation issue as it would refer to things
>that we don't actually bundled i.e this part "This product bundles
>SoundJS 0.6 …” would be incorrect as we don’t bundle SoundJS.
>> Have you seen a past decision that it is ok to synthesize or subset a
>> LICENSE file in order to use a pointer instead a copy?
>Yes it happened with Apache Flex releases, we taken bits we know are
>bundled and added those to license rather than the whole original
>license. I also seen it it other projects where they have taken parts of
>bootstrap. Is it clearly spelt out in a policy document? No not that I
>can find, but if a 3rd party license refers to A + B and you are only
>bundling A then there no need to mention B. The guiding principle of only
>mentioning what is actually bundled would also apply here. Sightly
>different but it's also done when we have dual licensed bundled bits, we
>select the license we want and ignore the one we don’t want.
Maybe I wasn't clear, but my thought was that if you subset a license, you
should copy the relevant bits into your license instead of creating a new
file to hold the subset. I'm looking for justification that it is ok to
create a new file to hold the subset.