On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 02/06/2012 02:44 PM, ant elder wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. >> <mfrank...@mitre.org> wrote: >>> >>> I am sure you know this (especially since you first pointed me at this >>> page), but the release FAQ [1] makes it sound like you need the header, if >>> you assume your templates are source: >>> >>> Which Files Must Contain An ASF License Text? >>> Every source file must contain the appropriate ASF License text. >>> >>> I am no lawyer, so I will defer to someone who has more experience than >>> me to help you determine whether your snippets count as source. >>> >> >> I think that is a bug in the Release FAQ. What i've been told in the >> past but which i can't find links to right now, is that the top level >> LICENSE file covers everything anyway and the individual license >> headers aren't strictly necessary especially for source files without >> significant IP. > > Really? That then would be quite some 'bug' IMO. > I can't recall have heard it said like this before, instead confirmation of > the above rule quite often. Exceptions (no headers) only being allowed for > sources without real IP value. > > Ate > >> IMHO if the headers are problematic for Wookie in >> those files then it would be ok to just not include the header. >> >> ...ant >>
I've just asked for clarification about this over at legal - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-124 ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
