Hi Astha, Thanks for your reply, no hard feelings, we kind of suspected already that that could've been the case :)
If you could put a NOTICE in the project root with a 'Part of the code of this project was based on Partuza (http://url , etc)' and restore the Apache License files in the affected files & add a notice to the files that are based on Partuza, that would be great, thanks. Also, when releasing a project under the Apache License, your advised to put that license header @ the top of all your files, and a LICENSE file (or NOTICE) containing the license info, for, well such situations really, that you can prove that those files were covered by the license, see the link i send in my initial reply for the exact details on how and what. Without such LICENSE file & headers in the files, no one could count on it really being apache licensed, which makes it a lot harder for interested people to depend on the fact that they can use the code. The apache.org site is a great resources for info on this subject. Again, thanks for the reply & I look forward to our future conversations on other topics :) -- Chris On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Astha Bhatnagar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Chris, Guido and All, > > First of all let me acknowledge the mistake and ask for apologies. One of > the engineers surely has taken a short cut. While that is something internal > to what I need to look into, I assure you that it was not to my knowledge. > It would have been foolish of me to do so publicly. > > I am not against derivative work, just that the goal was for a fresh > initiative. Having said that let me assure you that we will update the > license related text tomorrow our working day and make sure we stay > compliant to what is necessary. > > Thank you for bringing this out, I would rather know it now than later. > > I am looking forward for more fruitful interactions and taking esprit on > its way. > > best regards, > Astha > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:52 PM, Guido Barosio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> > >> > Let me take this opportunity to clarify that esprit is not a derivative >> work >> > of partuza. Esprit has been written from scratch by our R&D team. :) We >> have >> > used only one javascript file which we are working on to license as per >> the >> > derivative work requirements. We ourselves are APL 2.0 >> >> Well, maybe your R&D team (or one of the guys) took some code without >> mentioning? Ashta, what Chris said is definitely true and correct. >> Furthermore, the fact that many of your php pieces do not include a >> License triggers my attention. >> >> Anyway, this is good news and for sure we are all happy! >> >> BTW, is there something that Esprit already complies and Partuza does not? >> >> gb.- >> >> PS Chris: The "uglaaaaaayyyy" worked betta' than an md5 of your own >> source! ;-) >> >> >> -- >> Guido Barosio >> ----------------------- >> http://www.globant.com >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >
