Hey folks, I'm working on tidying up the source for Apache Kudu (incubating) in order to prepare for our first ASF release, and ran into a couple bits of confusion:
1) In the case that we've borrowed code from another Apache 2.0 licensed project, the licensing howto[1] says that there is no need to modify LICENSE unless it transitively has dependencies with such a requirement. Is this true even if the original dependency carries a copyright? For example, we bundle Twitter's Bootstrap library and currently have attribution in our LICENSE file[2] indicating the copyright (even though it's also at the top of the relevant files). Not necessary? We can just entirely ignore such dependencies in LICENSE and NOTICE so long as the original header's maintained? 2) In other cases we've bundled MIT or BSD-licensed source. The license says that redistributions must retain the text of the license. Is it sufficient that that text be only in the source code, or should we also duplicate it into LICENSE.txt as we've done for code derived from AsyncHBase? [3] 3) We have many thirdparty dependencies which are not "bundled" in the source release. Instead, our build process has a script which downloads them from the internet, unpacks, and compiles them. So, despite not being part of the artifact itself, they are required components for the build (and in most cases become static-linked into the binary). We currently list all of these dependencies and their licenses in LICENSE.txt. Is this necessary, or should we move these into a separate file? Thanks -Todd [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto [2] https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=blob;f=LICENSE.txt;h=347de4f88b5e6240f6e560b2b1208364d6042c55;hb=HEAD#l424 [3] https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=blob;f=LICENSE.txt;h=347de4f88b5e6240f6e560b2b1208364d6042c55;hb=HEAD#l553 -- Todd Lipcon Software Engineer, Cloudera
