Here's the ultimate resolution on the IP issue: * we don't do anything with existing (BSD) files even if we edit them * every new file we create gets an ASF license header
More details: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-293?focusedCommentId=15881595&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15881595 Thanks, Roman. On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Frank McQuillan <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Roman for working on this. > > If you feel a final answer will be ready next week, then yes by all means l > would suggest to the community that we wait and re-spin an RC2 with the > license headers issue resolved. Seems less overhead and effort than a > quick follow on release right after 1.10. Also, there some momentum going > with the legal discussion, so let's take advantage of that. > > Satoshi (release manager), are you OK pausing the RC2 until we hear back > from Roman next week? > > Thank you, > Frank > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Frank McQuillan <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Agree with Rahul re putting up an RC2 with the suggested changes from >> Roman, >> > including incorporating Ed's comments on copyright year and top level >> folder >> > naming. These are really items but let's respond to the RC1 reviewers >> the >> > best way we can. >> >> +1 to a respin. >> >> > Regarding the ASF legal issue being discussed, MADLib community is more >> than >> > happy to respond to any guidance from the fine folks at the ASF around >> > headers with appropriate licensing verbage. We just need to know what >> that >> > guidance is. >> >> Well, if you're ok respinning next week I hope to get you a final >> answer by then. >> Might as well kill two birds with the same RC. Or we can quickly do a >> follow up >> release once the licensing headers dust settles. Up to you guys. >> >> Thanks, >> Roman. >>
