On 1/29/15, 2:33 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> You can just add a comment before that public domain text, that it's >>public >> domain. >> >> That doesn't put any more constraints on users than the Apache License >>so >> you're fine. > >I's prefer to see in the actual files (so you know what is the public >domain content) as above but I also think it's needed somewhere top >level. If not the NOTICE file or perhaps then the LICENSE file as >suggested by "Attribution is required (in a similar fashion to permissive >licenses)". [1] Think what you do when adding MIT/BSD licenses (ie add >them to LICENSE). > >Take this scenario. Someone downloads the TLF repo because they want to >use it in their project, they take a look at the top level LICENSE/NOTICE >and currently would have no idea that there was content from the public >domain in our repo, so they just bundle it up and distribute it with no >changes to their LICENSE or NOTICE. If we put the attribution in the main NOTICE, then if we don’t package the tests in the release artifact we have to remember to change NOTICE or use a different NOTICE. I would imagine other projects who composite NOTICE files are exposed in the same way. All this is more reason for us to simply remove the public domain text and replace it with text from our README or something like that. Can we agree to do that? -Alex
