I'll poke the legal-discuss thread; however why can't we have the build script for the tar.gz start by removing the .md file?
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Anirudh <anirudh2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Justin, > > We cannot just remove the documentation without modifying the original > repo, since it is a submodule. > I have opened an issue to googletest to see if it can be relicensed: > https://github.com/google/googletest/issues/1604 > Is this acceptable for the release? > > For issue 1 and 2, is the information being in README and API docs enough > or do we need to add a > warning for Creative commons license when script is launched ? > > Anirudh > > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Justin Mclean <justinmcl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > My reading of that is the documentation is under a CC license and the > code > > under a different one. That's quite common. You could just not include > the > > documentation. > > Thanks, > > Justin > > > > On Sat., 12 May 2018, 9:48 am Anirudh, <anirudh2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Justin Mclean < > jus...@classsoftware.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > For 1 and 2, Considering that the Creative Commons License files > > aren't > > > > > part of the release source itself but downloaded when user calls > some > > > > > specific api or runs some script, would these be blocking issues ? > > > > > > > > No but this need to explicitly pointed out to the user that they are > > > > downloading something that is not compatable with the ALv2 > > > > > > > > > > The information regarding the license is currently added both to the > > README > > > of the example for 1, and also on the docs for the API call for 2. > > > Are you suggesting that some kind of warning be provided during > download > > of > > > these datasets? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For 3, I have added it to known issues and I look forward to any > > other > > > > > suggestions you have related to this. > > > > > > > > Ask the owner for it to be relicensed under another license? > > > > > > > > > > The link ( > > > > > > https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/ > ec44c6c1675c25b9827aacd08c0243 > > 3cccde7780/googlemock/docs/DevGuide.md > > > ) > > > states the following at the bottom : > > > > > > "This page is based on the Making GWT Better > > > <http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html> guide from > the > > > Google > > > Web Toolkit <http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/> project. Except as > > > otherwise noted <http://code.google.com/policies.html#restrictions>, > the > > > content of this page is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution > > 2.5 > > > License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/>." > > > > > > At the top it states the following :: > > > > > > "All Google Mock source and pre-built packages are provided under the > New > > > BSD License <http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php>." > > > > > > Since the CC-BY license states "except as otherwise noted", does this > > mean > > > that the CC-BY-2.5 license at the bottom is void ? > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Justin > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > --------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
