On 5/19/08, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  1) I personally only know how to write code; not how to create cute
>  kitten images. Therefore I don't question that Thoof could really have
>  created the source code at hand. And the source code is not *so*
>  complex. But in my world it takes more effort to create a kitten
>  image, than it does to create a kitten captcha component. Ideally it
>  would be nice if every file in the batch was followed by a
>  oneliner/tag, saying "created in-house", "3. party ASL", etc.

In an ideal world we could do anything with any IP. But the process of
the Software Grant and the IP Clearance have been vetted by the Legal
department of the ASF. The owner of Thoof has put his signature under
the Software Grant. This is as far as the ASF is concerned enough to
ensure due dilligence. Be it either source code or other IP
transferred under the grant.


>  2) But if we should be practical, then for my sake I trust the source
>  code, but if we could just get a "yes, images are created in-house" or
>  something from Thoof, then I would be satisfied. I know they have
>  signed of the zip file, but if I look at the ip-clearance page[0], I
>  see no dates on the "Check items" task. Does that mean that we don't
>  really know what the license are for those images?

Huh? What are you talking about? This check is for stuff that is not
under the ASL. Thoof has submitted the whole IP for distribution under
the Apache License, as per Software Grant. There is nothing to be
found that is not part of this grant.

None of the source files have the appropriate License header, nor does
the zip have a License file. And yet you are willing to accept the
source code to be distributable under the ASL, even though they are
clearly lacking the License headers and License.txt

>  3) I'm +1 for including the components, with or without the images
>  depending on what we find out with those.

There is nothing to find out. They fall under the software grant.
Either you mistrust the grant (I would like to know what the evidence
is why you think the images are not owned by thoof), and should vote
-1, or you trust the grant, and you cast your vote based on whether or
not you find it a worthy addition (could still be -1).

Martijn

Reply via email to