atom feed25 messages in org.apache.incubator.generalRe: Licence headers in template files
FromSent OnAttachments
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 1:58 am 
Christian GrobmeierFeb 6, 2012 2:07 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 2:44 am 
Franklin, Matthew B.Feb 6, 2012 5:36 am 
ant elderFeb 6, 2012 5:44 am 
Ate DoumaFeb 6, 2012 6:16 am 
ant elderFeb 6, 2012 6:30 am 
Jukka ZittingFeb 6, 2012 6:39 am 
Ate DoumaFeb 6, 2012 6:53 am 
Ate DoumaFeb 6, 2012 6:56 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 7:03 am 
sebbFeb 6, 2012 7:20 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 7:28 am 
sebbFeb 6, 2012 8:06 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 8:20 am 
ant elderFeb 6, 2012 8:29 am 
sebbFeb 6, 2012 8:40 am 
Greg SteinFeb 6, 2012 9:25 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 10:18 am 
Craig L RussellFeb 6, 2012 10:30 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 11:12 am 
Greg SteinFeb 6, 2012 11:38 am 
Ate DoumaFeb 6, 2012 11:41 am 
Ross GardlerFeb 6, 2012 12:23 pm 
sebbFeb 6, 2012 12:33 pm 
Subject:Re: Licence headers in template files
From:Ate Douma (at@douma.nu)
Date:Feb 6, 2012 6:56:29 am
List:org.apache.incubator.general

On 02/06/2012 03:40 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:

Hi,

[legal-discuss@?]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgar@opendirective.com> wrote:

Would it be acceptable for these files to *not* have licence headers in them?

Going further, you may want to explicitly declare that downstream users have the right to distribute their widgets under whatever terms they choose (without the conditions of section 4 of ALv2), regardless of whether they contain such template content from Wookie. A bit like the GPL exceptions mentioned in http://www.gnu.org/licenses/exceptions.html.

Very good point Jukka. AFAIK these templates are indeed intended to be used to kind of 'create' code, which output then preferably not require NOTICE obligations.

BR,