On 9/26/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Henry Jen wrote:
>> 2. Remove the copyright notice and apply source header to be conforming
>> with "Source File Headers for Code Developed at the ASF" section in [1].
>> Our legal would like to see the copyright notice in NOTICE file per
>> option 1.b. But I am not sure how APR would like to deal with it.
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>
> It's not a matter of how the apr project would 'like' to deal with it.
> You have attached a politely worded request, so we accept the code under
> the conditions of the grant, or we reject it for the conditions.
I'd just like to point out something that I tossed out at #apr. The ASL
is a flexible license. Unlike the GPL (which explicitly forbids adding
restrictions to it's license terms) it is possible to modify the ASL to
add other terms.
This means it's possible to inadvertantly re-add the Advertising clause
which many communities have spent years undoing.
You may not have thought that your polite request would modify the terms
of the code you granted us, but that's how it is. You will need to now
probably resubmit your code expressly under the ASL terms, and with your
employer's explicit consent.
I don't know if there's anything specific Cliff would like to see with
respect to undoing an advertising request once posted. Cliff? Best way
to unencumber this, now? (Note, code was originally submitted with Sun
Copyright notices.)
Maybe I'm missing some context, but I don't see what the problem is
with allowing a contributor to have their copyright notice placed in
the NOTICE file. I'm familiar with the history behind the BSD
advertising clause issue, but that was not about copyright notices.
What am I missing?
Cliff
