2012/5/29 Rob Weir <[email protected]>: > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Tsutomu Uchino <[email protected]> wrote: >> 2012/5/29 Rob Weir <[email protected]>: >>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Tsutomu Uchino <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi, Rob >>>> >>>> 2012/5/29 Rob Weir <[email protected]>: >>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> You could be in error. I hope you acknowledge that as a possibility. >>>>> I could be in error s well. So what either one of us believes is not >>>>> really the point, is it? Thus the suggestion to clarify the policy. >>>>> >>>>>> Category-B tarballs are there in an attempt to work around the >>>>>> fact that we are only supposed to be using binaries. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The restriction concerning category-b binaries is a restriction on >>>>> releases. >>>>> >>>>>> No other Apache project is carrying sources and patches to >>>>>> MPL'd tarballs in the repositories and, other than the >>>>>> configure option, we are giving them basically the same >>>>>> treatment as Category-A. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We're not including category-b source in releases. If we learned >>>>> anything in the last year I'd hope we learned that this was an >>>>> important distinction. >>>>> >>>> Release includes some JavaScript source having MPL header from moz module >>>> in openoffice.org/basis3.4/program/defaults and greprefs directories. >>>> >>> >>> The distinction between source and binary breaks down with interpreted >>> languages like Javascript. In such cases the distinction would be >>> between what we include in our released source tarballs versus what we >>> include in our released binary install sets. We may include >>> category-b in our binary packages, even if they are in Javascript, >>> though we may not include the same in our source packages. >>> >> Thanks to make it clear. In category-b section has the following >> paragraph. I thought "ASF product" includes binary release. >> But if it is not, I have no more concern among these files. >>>"Note that works written in a scripting language without a binary form >>>cannot be included in any ASF product under one of these licenses (see >>>Transition and Exceptions)." >> > > That text was in an old draft of the 3rd party licensing policy. It > is not in the current policy. If you scroll to the top of the page > you referenced, you should see that stated, as well as a link to the > "official policy". > > -Ro > >> Thanks, >> -- Tsutomu I wonder I have not noticed about it at starting to read it from top today. Thanks.
- Tsutomu
