On 9/20/16, 4:12 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> >> Remember that a senior Apache member recommended filing an >> upstream issue in this email [5]. > >That refers to a missing NOTICE file which is a different issue, how >notice files are handled is ASF policy and 3rd parties don’t need to >follow that. That's not to do with complying with the terms of a 3rd >party license which applies to everyone (including us). I will ask on legal discuss whether he was addressing this particular scenario or any third-party with documentation issues. That might help determine which path we should follow. > >> Given that the source header policy [2] says not to modify third-party >> headers, it seems odd to be modifying a third-party license file. > >Policy is not to remove or modify existing copyright or licenses (point >1). Modify here would refer to changing the terms of the license. >Including the full text of the 3rd party license could be done but it >this case it would be a documentation issue as it would refer to things >that we don't actually bundled i.e this part "This product bundles >SoundJS 0.6 …” would be incorrect as we don’t bundle SoundJS. > >> Have you seen a past decision that it is ok to synthesize or subset a >>third-party >> LICENSE file in order to use a pointer instead a copy? > >Yes it happened with Apache Flex releases, we taken bits we know are >bundled and added those to license rather than the whole original >license. I also seen it it other projects where they have taken parts of >bootstrap. Is it clearly spelt out in a policy document? No not that I >can find, but if a 3rd party license refers to A + B and you are only >bundling A then there no need to mention B. The guiding principle of only >mentioning what is actually bundled would also apply here. Sightly >different but it's also done when we have dual licensed bundled bits, we >select the license we want and ignore the one we don’t want. Maybe I wasn't clear, but my thought was that if you subset a license, you should copy the relevant bits into your license instead of creating a new file to hold the subset. I'm looking for justification that it is ok to create a new file to hold the subset. -Alex
