atom feed20 messages in org.apache.legal-discussMPLv2 on AL2 header review ...
FromSent OnAttachments
Michael MeeksMay 23, 2012 3:05 am 
Roy T. FieldingMay 25, 2012 11:45 am 
Michael MeeksMay 29, 2012 3:22 am 
Benson MarguliesMay 29, 2012 7:18 am 
Juergen SchmidtMay 29, 2012 8:14 am 
Sam RubyMay 29, 2012 11:37 am 
Juergen SchmidtMay 30, 2012 1:29 am 
Michael MeeksMay 30, 2012 1:33 am 
Greg SteinMay 30, 2012 2:20 am 
Greg SteinMay 30, 2012 2:40 am 
Michael MeeksMay 30, 2012 6:04 am 
Jim JagielskiMay 30, 2012 7:26 am 
Richard FontanaMay 30, 2012 8:07 am 
Sam RubyMay 30, 2012 9:40 am 
Jim JagielskiMay 30, 2012 9:59 am 
Jim JagielskiMay 30, 2012 10:13 am 
Lawrence RosenMay 30, 2012 12:44 pm 
Greg SteinMay 30, 2012 3:42 pm 
Richard FontanaMay 31, 2012 3:31 am 
Greg SteinMay 31, 2012 4:06 am 
Subject:MPLv2 on AL2 header review ...
From:Michael Meeks (mich@suse.com)
Date:May 23, 2012 3:05:08 am
List:org.apache.legal-discuss

Hi guys,

We are doing the ground-work for file-by-file, incremental re-basing of our work on top of the same code release by Oracle under the Apache License 2.0. Since the overwhelming majority of files in the Apache OpenOffice incubator repository are un-touched since checkin (aside from new license headers and some permission fixes) this should initially be reasonably uncomplicated. As noted ad-nasusem elsewhere, we plan to do this under the MPLv2 license - more details here:

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Relicensing

As such, we need a new header for source code that makes the situation clear. We want to get this right, I append the existing suggestion labelled to aid the discussion, with the hope that it will conclude in linear time :-)

Our intention would be to include the relevant NOTICE file, MPLv2 and Apache licenses into our existing source repository and documentation distributed with the product.

My hope is that the MPLv2 header 'M' and lines 'G' meet the requirement of a prominent notice that the file is modified.

Those with keen eyesight will notice the removal of the substantial disclaimer which appears permissible under the AL2 section 4.3. We are eager to have a short, MPLv2-like license header to improve readability. Both the linked licenses contain this sort of comprehensive "if it breaks you get two pieces !" language in their text.

Thanks in advance for your input; maintaining the CC is much appreciated by those not subscribed to the list :-)

Regards,

Michael.

[ apologies for the re-send, was blocked by moderation it seems =]

/* C Copyright 2012 LibreOffice contributors. C M This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public M License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this M file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. M G This file incorporates work covered by the following license notice: G A Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one A or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file A distributed with this work for additional information A regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file A to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the A "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance A with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at A A http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 */