Dammit, I meant to paste in the references.

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Leo Simons <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:
>> IAN ALE is much nicer. IAN, ALE! is better still :-)
>
> :-). Good plan!
>
>> I removed mention of granted code from NOTICE because while watching
>> incubator-general@, it was mentioned that NOTICE should be minimal.
>
> Yes, it should be minimal.

...per http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#notice-content

>> [[
>> The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party
>> notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright notices moved from
>> source files submitted to the ASF.
>> ]]
>>
>> "required third-party notices" is only PluggedIn Software and I'm taking
>> *may* as RFC 2119 "may", hence not required for HP granted material.
>
> So, err, I guess that last sentence is ambiguous :-). I think you
> should interpret it differently: I think it should be "The NOTICE file
> MUST include all copyright notices moved from source files submitted
> to the ASF, UNLESS the copyright holder removes the notice". I.e.
> because you cannot ever completely remove a copyright notice for
> someone else, if it's there, you SHOULD move it, and then you SHOULD
> move it to the NOTICE file, but you definitely MUST NOT erase it
> completely.

...per http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#header-existingcopyright

> If you are producing a binary distribution, the license SHOULD
> also be in the top level LICENSE file of that distribution, per the
> BSD license itself:

...and per 
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses


cheerio,


Leo

Reply via email to