On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 11:02 +0200, Stefano Bagnara wrote: > Hi, > > We (Apache JAMES project) are developing an SPF implementation in java > (jSPF) [1]. > > Part of our test suite works by parsing 2 YAML files [2][3] provided as > part of the OpenSPF group [4] TestSuite [5] > > Currently we wrote the java tests to simply "silently pass" if the 2 > yaml files are not there and we place them only in our local checkout, > but we would like to understand if we are allowed to place them in our > svn repository and to redistribute them in the sources tar.gz. > > The 2 files [2][3] have no specific license header. > The OpenSPF group website [4] tells "Unless noted otherwise, all content > on this website is dual-licensed under the GNU GPL v2 and the Creative > Commons CC BY-SA 2.5." > > So the first question is: are we allowed to redistribute unmodified yaml > files originally licensed under the "Creative Commons CC BY-SA 2.5"? Do > we just need the usual NOTICE reference and LICENSE pointer?
from what i can tell, Creative Commons CC BY-SA 2.5 is a reciprocal license. AIUI this would mean that it shouldn't be distributed as part of an apache release. (hopefully people will jump in with corrections if this is incorrect) > Second option: an spf-devel member reported that the yaml files have > been developed as part of pyspf [6] and are released under the Python > Software Foundation License [7]. The PSFL is a BSD derived license (in > principle) but contains a lot of sentences and is not listed in the ASF > license guidelines [8]. > > WDYT? the python license looks BSDish to me. opinions? - robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
