Perfectly valid answer with one caveat: I don't know of any Apache policy that directly applies here. I'd bet that
if httpd had what it considered a valid reason for including the source of a Category-B licensed product in their svn tree, nobody, not even the board, would have grounds to object, especially not if they'd passed the issue off to LEGAL and didn't receive a negative response. >________________________________ > From: Pedro Giffuni <p...@apache.org> >To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> >Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 10:08 AM >Subject: Re: Category-B tarballs in SVN (was Re: External libraries) > >If you are asking me (and only me); > >--- Ven 13/1/12, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> ha scritto: > >> Why hasn't there been a LEGAL jira >> issue >> filed about this at this point? As I said >> it's a gray area that I'm certain the IPMC >> has no existing governing policy on, and I'm also >> certain that your mentors will disagree in >> the opinions they are providing to you. >> > >I don't like gray areas: I think we should comply >crystal clear with Apache policies and solve this >beyond doubt. > >As I said before, the solution is easy: dropping >the files from SVN and providing sufficient >instructions on where to get them. > >Pedro. > > > >
