Open Stack

On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 13:29 -0400, Monty Taylor wrote:
> 
> On 08/16/2012 01:12 PM, John Griffith wrote:
> > Hey Everyone,
> > 
> > A while back there was some discussion taking place in the PPB
> > meetings regarding copyright headers.  There was some concern as I
> > recall from lawyers regarding the addition of assigning Copyright to
> > Openstack LLC etc. (don't ask me, I'm not a lawyer).
> 
> Yeah. Our CLA does not actually require copyright assignment... however
> many people shove Openstack LLC in the header, rather than themselves or
> the company they work for. The right policy for when and how to do that
> is something that various people who are actually lawyers should
> probably do some education for people on.
>
> > I was wondering if there was ever a solid decision on how we wanted to
> > proceed with header files?  Are we just including the Apache header,
> > both or some other form?  Did I misinterpret the topic that was being
> > discussed?
> 
> I do not know what decisions may or may not have been made regarding
> OpenStack LLC usage in copyright headers. However, files all need the
> Apache header, and they need at least one copyright line (the line
> asserts who owns the copyright and the header indicates under what
> license terms they are granting the content to others) Because we do not
> do copyright assignment, you can expect to see, as the project goes on,
> a proliferation of different copyright lines, and there will likely be
> many files with multiple copyright lines. However, if you are in doubt
> as to what copyright line you should or should not add to files you are
> hacking on, you should double-check with someone who has more legal
> clout than I.

My assumption is that OpenStack LLC indicates the code was written by a
Rackspace developer and Rackspace has blanket assigned its copyright to
OpenStack LLC (which is owned by Rackspace).

Cheers,
Mark.