Hey Shane, Thanks for this clear explanation. Let me take a look at /legal. I agree that our policy should be “Apache projects should include a Copyright statement on their websites”. Then I can grab the regex and suggest that as a template. Simple.
That work for you? I’ll try and find a good spot on the website to update it, and return to this thread shortly. Cheers, Chris On 10/9/17, 7:38 AM, "Shane Curcuru" <[email protected]> wrote: Chris Mattmann wrote on 10/8/17 5:29 PM: > Hey Team, > > Sorry I am missing the context here. What’s up? How can I help? Root question: Should Apache projects include a Copyright statement on their websites? Yes, No, or needs more discussion? My vote is for Yes, we (including Apache projects) should clearly state our copyrights along with our license. Since this is most closely related to licensing, I figured it was in VP, Legal's baliwick. If Yes, then we should write this down as a policy under /legal/ so that the Whimsy tool's checking can reference that policy. > > Cheers, > Chris > > > > > On 10/8/17, 3:41 AM, "Shane Curcuru" <[email protected]> wrote: > > sebb wrote on 10/8/17 6:29 AM: > > Some of the website checks don't have pointers to documentation: > > > > events > > Rich, do you have a public written URL that requires (or asks) projects > to include the code snippet for the apachecon events listing? Or is > this not maintained currently? > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/content/events/README.txt > > > image > This is Sally as VP, Marketing & Publicity, since she owns the a.o > homepage. I don't know if it's a requirement yet, but it's used to > generate links on the homepage; so projects without an image there will > look pretty dumb with an image placeholder. I'll ask her. > > See also: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/content/img/HEADER.html > > > copyright > This would be Chris as VP, Legal, I presume. I never thought about it, > but I believe it's important and should absolutely be a requirement. > > > I assume there are reasons for including these checks, in which case > > the doc links are needed. > > > > Anyone know where to find these requirements? > > > > If not, the checks should be dropped from the analysis/display (if not > > the extraction phase) > > > > No, they should not be dropped, because they are still clearly useful - > although UI to mark them separately would be fine. I.e. the "image" may > not (yet) be an ASF *requirement*, it's still an important thing to have > a check for. > > -- > > - Shane > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources > > > -- - Shane https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources
