On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Cory Johns <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marvin,
>
> We've been having some discussion and I'd just like to clarify something
> you said:
>
>> Any artifact that is being distributed through Apache channels is
>> supposed to adhere to our policies.
>
> Does this mean that as long as we are releasing the sub-packages on PyPI
> only, and not through Apache channels, that we can leave out the LICENSE
> and NOTICE files (with license headers remaining in the individual files
> and the top-level LICENSE and NOTICE file remaining in the ASF release, of
> course)?
Thanks for the thoughtful inquiry, Cory.
Downstream products are the work of the individuals who prepare them. Apache
PMCs can't exert oversight over downstream products, we can't VOTE on them or
veto them or provide consistent quality control.
That said, I don't believe you have the option of omitting the NOTICE file
from the PyPI release, or at least the relevant portion of the NOTICE file --
the ALv2 requires propagation of any relevant notices therein to derivative
works. See section 4d:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#redistribution
It's a little odd to have discussions on an ASF project dev list
about downstream products which deliberately diverge from ASF policy, but so
long as what's being contemplated is legally sound, it's a gray area. To
avoid a "too many cooks" situation, I'm inclined to defer to Allura's Mentors,
who presumably have a more complete context about the motivations, costs and
benefits of various alternatives.
HTH,
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
