Hi, all I have signed the two documents( http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt and http://www.apache.org/licenses/iclas), and emailed the scan version to secretary at apache.org. So what I should do next is? Should I contact all major contributors and ask for the agreement to this: http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt. Or I just identify all the major contributors and wait for next step? Anything I can do please let me know :)
Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>; "Ryan pan" <p...@mailtech.cn> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 11:18 AM Subject: Re: mod_fcgid license questions > pqf wrote: >> Hi, guys >> Nice to meet you :) I hope I can help to clarify the questions. > > Likewise :) > >>> When you wrote mod_fcgid, was there any code which you borrowed >>> from mod_fastcgi? >> No. I didn't borrow any code from mod_fastcgi. > > That's good - we are looking at the headers you use and the fcgi package > liberal licensing (as opposed to the mod_fastcgi package). > >>> Your current intention is for mod_fcgid to be available under >>> the GPL version 2.0, correct? Could you confirm that you wanted >>> the GPL to apply to all the mod_fcgid code? >> Yes, I confirm I wanted the GPL version 2.0 apply to everything. > > So to clarify, you don't seem strongly married to any particular license. > > Is the AL 2.0 acceptable and would you be willing to license it such, or > offer a software grant under the terms of the AL 2.0? See > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt > > we would also want to capture a CLA so that you can contribute your own > ideas to the new code > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas > > Finally, if there are other contributors to the efforts, aside from the > obvious simple bug fixes and maintenance, we would need their buy-in as > well, and count on you to identify such people that have shaped fcgid. > > Looking forward to this solution! > > Bill >