On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Eric Charles <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Just for information (don't know if it's relevant to us), the following
> thread where Edward seems to have fun :)
>
> Read Dan's points 1 and 2.

I resigned from Legal Affairs last year but AFACT nothing much has
changed since then. If there were any major changes in Apache policy,
I hope I would have read about it by now. But I missed anything then
please jump in and correct me.

In particular, IMO his views on LICENSE and NOTICE are (at best)
controversial and (at worst) may be misleading.

It's best practice to include licenses within LICENSE as full text (to
avoid the issues we had earlier). Issuing DEPENDENCIES is ok if all
the information is complete for all third party material shipped. For
applications (as opposed to libraries), DEPENDENCIES are particularly
problematic. (I've started collaborating over in Maven-land on
improved solutions.)

Dan is simply wrong about NOTICE documents. Policy hasn't changed [1].
Too many projects included too much stuff but somewhere along the line
"include just what's specified" has become "don't include anything".
<sigh>

Robert

[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to