Open Stack

Works for me. This information is easy to derive for people who want it,
and given no one has complained I feel like we're just polishing something
which is already fine.

Michael


On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 04/29/2013 02:08 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 11:04 -0400, Monty Taylor wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>> Totally feasible to do, if it's something that people want.
> >>
> >> I think - no matter how much we can clean it up - there's very little
> >> value in requiring those shipping OpenStack to include an attribution
> >> notice which credits every single copyright holder. Requiring an
> >> attribution to the OpenStack project is probably annoying enough, but
> >> attributing hundreds of copyright holders would be pretty ridiculous.
> >
> > Yeah.... just because we can do NOTICE files doesn't mean we should. I
> > take from Richard's advice that it's not necessary for us and provides
> > no additional value, so I'd prefer to continue ignoring them like I
> > always did. And use the time we'd collectively spend on automating the
> > creation of them (no matter how small) onto something more useful :)
>
> ++
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-discuss mailing list
> legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/legal-discuss/attachments/20130430/52b5d58b/attachment.html>