-1 regarding the use of the ASL2 license for readme files. Because it is the wrong license for that kind of work.
Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > So we can't decide as a community? Weird :-o > > Jacques > > > > Le 16/09/2016 à 10:21, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : > >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Devs, >>> >>> There are mixed opinions about putting or not the ASL2 header in OFBiz >>> README files. >>> >>> One one hand we can read at http://www.apache.org/legal/sr >>> c-headers.html#faq-exceptions that README files don't require a header >>> >>> But to protect our work we can decide to put a header in all README files >>> (with or w/o suffixes). It's all or none to be consistent. >>> >>> Since License is an important matter I think a vote is necessary to >>> define >>> our policy. >>> >>> So please vote >>> >>> [+1] include a header in all README files >>> >>> [-1] do not include a header in any README files >>> >>> [0] Undecided >>> >>> I will close this vote in a week, thanks for your time ! >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> In my opinion this vote is not valid and should be cancelled. >> My reasoning is the following: the result of this vote may be against the >> ASF license policy and as a project we are not allowed to change the ASF >> license policy by vote. In fact our codebase is licensed by the ASF and >> not >> by OFBiz. >> >> Why am I saying that the result of this vote may be against the ASF >> license >> policy? >> >> If we decide to "not include a header in any README files" then we will >> violate the following [*]: >> >> "A file without any degree of creativity in either its literal elements or >> its structure is not protected by copyright law; therefore, such a file >> does not require a license header. If in doubt about the extent of the >> file's creativity, add the license header to the file." >> >> In fact it would be difficult to state that the following file (for >> example) does't contain "any degree of creativity": >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/README.md?view=markup >> >> In fact it contains useful documentation that was contributed by different >> people who spent time crafting its content. >> >> When in doubt, we should add the license header (as stated in the document >> that Jacques and I referenced); or we can omit it if we judge that the >> file >> doesn't contain any degree of creativity. >> But definitely we can't blindly decide by vote for all the files matching >> a >> name (i.e. README) as proposed by Jacques in this vote. >> Since deciding on a case by case may be tricky and even subjective, my >> *personal* preference would be to add to all the files the license header. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Jacopo >> >> [*] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions >> >> >
