On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:17 AM, Shawn Jiang wrote:

> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/branches/2.2/plugins/concurrent/geronimo-concurrent-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/concurrent/harmony
> 
> FutureTask.java
> ThreadPoolExecutor.java
> RejectedExecutionHandler.java
> 
> 
> I could found following license head instead of ASL in the source code above.
> /*
> * Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166
> * Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at
> * http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
> */
> 
> Can anyone suggest if we should do something with these source code ?

Hi Shawn,
Good question. 

First, in general, creative commons copyright-only dedication is a valid source 
license for an Apache project -- 
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a . More specifically, see 
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#concurrent . So, those source files 
are fine from a legal perspective.

Next question is how should we handle the licensing? Our choices are:

1) Treat the Copyright-Only Dedication as a license. Or,
2) License the files under AL2.

Unless we've altered the source (beyond package rename), I think we should do 
1).

Since these files are in our source tree (and not included from a binary 
dependency), we should license in two places: 1) the boilerplate underlay 
LICENSE (this handles our binary distributions) and 2) 
server/branches/2.2/LICENSE (this handles our source distribution).

--kevan

Reply via email to