Hi Jacopo,
Le 04/04/2018 à 12:12, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
Hi Jacques,
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:54 AM, <jler...@apache.org> wrote:
Author: jleroux
Date: Thu Nov 16 05:54:23 2017
New Revision: 1815412
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1815412&view=rev
Log:
No functional change.
With this fix, about the Quicksand Google font licensed under the
SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE Version 1.1, we are now clear from all licensing
issues
Though we are still waiting for INFRA-15466 to check the RAT Buildbot
result...
BTW I referred to https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html about how
to
handle this case. Only a change in NOTICE was needed, not in LICENSE. Nice
TLP
document, that I'll check again later...
Modified:
ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/NOTICE
ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/themes/rainbowstone/README.md
ofbiz/tools/rat-excludes.txt
Modified: ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/NOTICE
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/
NOTICE?rev=1815412&r1=1815411&r2=1815412&view=diff
============================================================
==================
--- ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/NOTICE (original)
+++ ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/NOTICE Thu Nov 16 05:54:23 2017
@@ -3,3 +3,8 @@ Copyright 2001-2017 The Apache Software
This product includes software developed by
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
+=========================================================================
+
+This product bundles the "Quicksand Google font", which is available
+under the "SIL OFL License 1.1" license.
+For details, see themes/rainbowstone/webapp/rainbowstone/fonts/quicksand
I believe that the above should be in the LICENSE file, not in the NOTICE
file, according to [1].
Unless there are specific reasons for which you added it to the NOTICE
file, I will move it there.
Regards,
Jacopo
[1] https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
Looking at it again, I don't remember what decided me to refer to Nifi licensing guide. I
said "I'll check again later..." and I just did.
I think you are right. It's a kind of Category-A licenses. Hence should not
need a NOTICE but a LICENSE change.
Ah wait, I think what decided me to put it in NOTICE is because it's a free license but not a MIT/BSD type. I read at
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice:
Copyright notifications which have been relocated <http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers> from source files (rather than removed)
must be preserved in |NOTICE|.
However, elements such as the copyright notifications embedded within BSD and MIT licenses need <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59>
not <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-62> be duplicated in |NOTICE| -- it suffices to leave those notices in their original locations.
Then I did not refer-to/read the relocated link and I understand now that
relocated means that the licensed product has been donated to the ASF.
I tough think that it would be good to ask legal. Not because I doubt but it will help future possible users to find this license in the Category-A
licenses list at http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html.
What do you think?
Jacques
