On 2/6/16, 8:29 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> >So the question is, what parts of NOTICE pertaining to Apache projects >must we >propagate, and what portions can we omit? I'd say that the name of the >Apache >project and the copyright statement ought to be bubbled up. > >And this interpretation is consistent with the guidance in the Licensing >How-To: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto#bundle-asf-product > > It is not necessary to duplicate the line "This product includes >software > developed at the Apache Software Foundation...", though the ASF >copyright > line and any other portions of NOTICE must be considered for >propagation. I don't disagree with your logic, but just for the sake of argument, I assume we are talking about these two lines: Apache [PRODUCT_NAME] Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation I would argue that the copyright of an ASF dependency, if it follows this template, does not need to be propagated because it is a collective copyright and the dependency is now part of a larger collective copyright which is going to be the 2nd line of the NOTICE for the actual distribution. And by doing so, you make the NOTICE one line shorter for every dependency and avoid duplicate copyright lines with varying year ranges. If the copyright notice is not from this template, then the decision might depend on those differences. And I would argue that we should change the rules for LICENSE and put all bundled dependencies, ASF or non-ASF, in the LICENSE so there is one place to look and avoid propagating the product name from NOTICE and save another line per dependency. Thanks, -Alex
