On 2/10/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > a) we allow people to own the copyright (Copyright bla bla Carlos Sanchez) > > - that person needs to allow change of license > > - when somebody contributes he should (or may want to) add his name to > > the copyright > > - if we move a plugin to ASF we can do it, adding the ASF and keeping > > the old one, notice should state that parts are one license while > > other parts are ASF > > Or removing the old one if everyone is brought with it, which is usually > necessary for auditing anyway (they need to sign clas, and a code grant).
That's a problem if the person can't be contacted > > > b) we don't allow it, copyright is owned by the team (Apache Software > > Foundation or The Codehaus) > > - change of license can be done if the team agrees > > - copyright doesn't change > > I'm not 100% sure you can do this, though putting that in the copyright > header makes things a whole lot simpler and I'd say we recommend it. > > How about: > 1) plugins can choose Codehaus' MIT or ASL 2 +1 > 2) very few plugins are allowed with *GPL dependencies. Special cases. > The plugin code is licensed MIT (as ASL is not compatible due to the > patent clause), but the plugin as a whole is *GPL as a derivative work. +1 > 3) We allow but discourage people to put their own name in the > copyright. We use The Codehaus as the copyright name. I think to avoid problems we shouldn't allow it. The case I remember is dbunit where the curent developers would like to change from GPL to ASL but they can't get hold of one of the first contributors (or something like that)
