Also, if I recall, it was initially decided to not include a license header
to the main README.md file in the root folder: however now that the file
represents an important part of the OFBiz documentation, I think we should
revisit that decision and add a license header to it.

Jacopo

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Devs,
>>
>> There are mixed opinions about putting or not the ASL2 header in OFBiz
>> README files.
>>
>> One one hand we can read at http://www.apache.org/legal/sr
>> c-headers.html#faq-exceptions that README files don't require a header
>>
>> But to protect our work we can decide to put a header in all README files
>> (with or w/o suffixes). It's all or none to be consistent.
>>
>> Since License is an important matter I think a vote is necessary to
>> define our policy.
>>
>> So please vote
>>
>> [+1] include a header in all README files
>>
>> [-1] do not include a header in any README files
>>
>> [0] Undecided
>>
>> I will close this vote in a week, thanks for your time !
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
> In my opinion this vote is not valid and should be cancelled.
> My reasoning is the following: the result of this vote may be against the
> ASF license policy and as a project we are not allowed to change the ASF
> license policy by vote. In fact our codebase is licensed by the ASF and not
> by OFBiz.
>
> Why am I saying that the result of this vote may be against the ASF
> license policy?
>
> If we decide to "not include a header in any README files" then we will
> violate the following [*]:
>
> "A file without any degree of creativity in either its literal elements
> or its structure is not protected by copyright law; therefore, such a file
> does not require a license header. If in doubt about the extent of the
> file's creativity, add the license header to the file."
>
> In fact it would be difficult to state that the following file (for
> example) does't contain "any degree of creativity":
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/README.md?view=markup
>
> In fact it contains useful documentation that was contributed by different
> people who spent time crafting its content.
>
> When in doubt, we should add the license header (as stated in the document
> that Jacques and I referenced); or we can omit it if we judge that the file
> doesn't contain any degree of creativity.
> But definitely we can't blindly decide by vote for all the files matching
> a name (i.e. README) as proposed by Jacques in this vote.
> Since deciding on a case by case may be tricky and even subjective, my
> *personal* preference would be to add to all the files the license header.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jacopo
>
> [*] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to