[Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] Copyrights and License Headers in source files]
Wow, interesting - people including copyright notices in blueprints Cheers, Mark. -------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Russell Bryant <rbryant@redhat.com> To: Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> Cc: openstack-tc@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-tc] Copyrights and License Headers in source files Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 18:55:38 -0400
On 05/01/2013 06:12 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 05/01/2013 06:05 PM, John Griffith wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Mark Washenberger <mark.washenberger@markwash.net <mailto:mark.washenberger@markwash.net>> wrote:
Hi folks,
I was looking into the ASL-2.0, and chanced across the fact that in Apache projects, they require that source files only have the License Header, and may not have any copyright notices [1]. It occurred to me that we waste a fair amount of time on copyrights in license headers, and it would be nice not to have to do that anymore.
I would like to hear more about the time waste there - where are we spending time? Can we do something to make that better?
I think that only applies to code submitted directly to ASF, but regardless you wouldn't get any objections from me regarding your proposal. Some of the legal teams in companies involved in OpenStack however may feel differently.
And some of the developers. I would not like that.
I would really like to see more folks learn about appropriate addition of copyright attribution when they work on a file, because I think it's quite important. Don't think that removing attribution from each file would prevent people from needing to do it - if we moved to a NOTICE file system, they'd need to put the notice there.
+1
I also think that it's important that the attribution be per-file and not just in a NOTICE file, because the world has moved on from the days when tarballs were the primary mechanism of source code distribution. We publish this all on the web now. So this:
https://github.com/openstack-dev/pbr/blob/master/pbr/packaging.py
without per-file attribution, would not indicate who the license associated with this file was from.
I'm actually more troubled by seeing folks put copyright headers on blueprints.
Fascinating. I wonder if they realize that they're just asserting copyright on the text of the blueprint itself...
It's quite irritating. It's not clear at all what the intention is. Here are some examples:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/accurate-capacity-of-clusters-fo...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/deploy-vcenter-templates-from-vm...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/esx-resource-pools-as-compute-no...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/multiple-clusters-managed-by-one...
I emailed the submitted and asked for clarification on the intent, but haven't heard anything back.
Monty, since the ones I've noticed are from HP, perhaps this is something you can help track down?
I also noticed a previous conversation [2] on this subject. I have not found any policy that actually requires us to include copyrights with each source file license header.
Feel free to suggest that this is more trouble than it is worth, but I'd like to propose that we discourage new contributions from including copyright attribution, and provide a process to work with the various parties we have to remove the copyrights from existing files. Somewhere along the line, somebody (maybe even me!) could write some appropriate hooks to ensure the (now identical) license header is present in every file for every submission.
Also, feel free to suggest that I'm plain wrong and am still wet behind the ears--I won't be terribly surprised!
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers [2] http://markmail.org/message/eawha7pjiqoslm66?q=openstack+license+source+head...
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
-- Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:46:03AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Wow, interesting - people including copyright notices in blueprints
I updated the FAQ https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LegalIssuesFAQ#Copyright_Notices_in_Blueprin... This is just based on what I understand to be existing and reasonable OpenStack convention, that blueprints contain no copyright notice; the four examples given of blueprints containing a copyright notice are all from one individual. If anyone thinks there is some more interesting issue here please feel free to discuss. - RF
Cheers, Mark.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Russell Bryant <rbryant@redhat.com> To: Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> Cc: openstack-tc@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-tc] Copyrights and License Headers in source files Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 18:55:38 -0400
On 05/01/2013 06:12 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 05/01/2013 06:05 PM, John Griffith wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Mark Washenberger <mark.washenberger@markwash.net <mailto:mark.washenberger@markwash.net>> wrote:
Hi folks,
I was looking into the ASL-2.0, and chanced across the fact that in Apache projects, they require that source files only have the License Header, and may not have any copyright notices [1]. It occurred to me that we waste a fair amount of time on copyrights in license headers, and it would be nice not to have to do that anymore.
I would like to hear more about the time waste there - where are we spending time? Can we do something to make that better?
I think that only applies to code submitted directly to ASF, but regardless you wouldn't get any objections from me regarding your proposal. Some of the legal teams in companies involved in OpenStack however may feel differently.
And some of the developers. I would not like that.
I would really like to see more folks learn about appropriate addition of copyright attribution when they work on a file, because I think it's quite important. Don't think that removing attribution from each file would prevent people from needing to do it - if we moved to a NOTICE file system, they'd need to put the notice there.
+1
I also think that it's important that the attribution be per-file and not just in a NOTICE file, because the world has moved on from the days when tarballs were the primary mechanism of source code distribution. We publish this all on the web now. So this:
https://github.com/openstack-dev/pbr/blob/master/pbr/packaging.py
without per-file attribution, would not indicate who the license associated with this file was from.
I'm actually more troubled by seeing folks put copyright headers on blueprints.
Fascinating. I wonder if they realize that they're just asserting copyright on the text of the blueprint itself...
It's quite irritating. It's not clear at all what the intention is. Here are some examples:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/accurate-capacity-of-clusters-fo...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/deploy-vcenter-templates-from-vm...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/esx-resource-pools-as-compute-no...
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/multiple-clusters-managed-by-one...
I emailed the submitted and asked for clarification on the intent, but haven't heard anything back.
Monty, since the ones I've noticed are from HP, perhaps this is something you can help track down?
I also noticed a previous conversation [2] on this subject. I have not found any policy that actually requires us to include copyrights with each source file license header.
Feel free to suggest that this is more trouble than it is worth, but I'd like to propose that we discourage new contributions from including copyright attribution, and provide a process to work with the various parties we have to remove the copyrights from existing files. Somewhere along the line, somebody (maybe even me!) could write some appropriate hooks to ensure the (now identical) license header is present in every file for every submission.
Also, feel free to suggest that I'm plain wrong and am still wet behind the ears--I won't be terribly surprised!
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers [2] http://markmail.org/message/eawha7pjiqoslm66?q=openstack+license+source+head...
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
-- Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing list OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
_______________________________________________ legal-discuss mailing list legal-discuss@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss
Hi Richard, On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 12:19 -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:46:03AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Wow, interesting - people including copyright notices in blueprints
I updated the FAQ https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LegalIssuesFAQ#Copyright_Notices_in_Blueprin...
This is just based on what I understand to be existing and reasonable OpenStack convention, that blueprints contain no copyright notice; the four examples given of blueprints containing a copyright notice are all from one individual.
I've reviewed the text of your answer in detail and I approve of the way you've captured the various nuances involved. Thanks, Mark.
participants (2)
-
Mark McLoughlin
-
Richard Fontana