Hi Rob, 2013/6/8 Rob Weir <[email protected]>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Guy Waterval <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I would know what has to be written on a derivated *documentation* work > > (modified or translated) based on an original work published with an > Apache > > licence. > > > > Is the original work a work published by an Apache project? Or is it > a 3rd party work from outside Apache that you are modifying? > > And is the destination of the modified work for publication by this > project? Or is it for independent publication outside of the project. > > (In other words, where is it coming from and where is it going?) > > Although the license is the same in these cases, there are differences > in Apache policy. If you can give more details we can give a more > specific answer. > Many thanks for your answer. Here are some clarifications. It concerns my own docs, published with an ALV2 license. I could have the opportunity to work on it with a group, a little as ODFAuthors do. So, the different chapters would be released with a list of authors/contributors and the copyright name would be the name of the group. The licence is still ALv2.0. I would insert a notice in the files, with clear instructions for third parties (companies, schools, administrations, editors, etc.) which would reuse and modify the work, so that they know exactly how to do, if they modify the work to fit it to their own specific needs and distribute it on their own Intranet or in a printed version. I would avoid to receive too much questions, and would try to solve this issue in a clear notice explaining the procedure. It's also important for people who will join to this effort of documentation. I think they have the right to understand clearly how the work they will produce could be reused to decide whether they participate or not. Regards -- gw > >
