On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >> >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> If you want to strictly follow #2 rule then all of them will need a >>>>> different NOTICE/LICENSE for each package but as you can see this is an >>>>> extensive list and they all use the same file. If this is really an >>>>> issue >>>>> for the board >>>> >>>> no: this a matter for the PMCs and legal affairs >>> >>> Cool! >>> I only head "Legal Affairs" in the context of 3rd party before: "Licenses >>> not appearing on these lists must be explicitly approved by the ASF Legal >>> Affairs officer prior to distribution." >>> So, as long as we comply with what is already written in the 3rd party >>> document we (JAMES PMC) can decide whatever we want and there is no ASF >>> policy for this? >> >> IIRC the 3rd party document is just a draft. what matters is complying >> with the policy about LICENSE and NOTICE documents described in other >> places > > I know this http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > and I monitor http://www.apache.org/legal/ and referred documents. > Is there anything else I should know / any other policy?
the older location is http://www.apache.org/dev >> but yes, the policy is relatively wide and JAMES is relatively free to >> decide > > Good to know. > >>>>> and #2 is a rule for the board then the board should read this >>>>> list and take action to allow people understand there is such a rule, >>>>> because WE (ASF committers) are not really aware of all of this stuff: >>>>> we >>>>> need as few rules as possible, but written somewhere :-) >>>> >>>> no: this a matter for the PMCs and legal affairs >>> >>> Sorry but this is not clear. In this specific case: is it something we >>> can >>> decide ourselves or something we should submit to legal affairs? >>> Should I open a JIRA issue on the new LEGAL JIRA for this? >> >> the board delegates to the legal-affairs on issues such as this. so >> legal affairs needs to be contacts, not the board. > > Are the "LEGAL" JIRA project and the legal-discuss list the right places to > contact this "Legal-affairs" ? unless it's confidential, yes - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
