Open Stack

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_Blueprints

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 at redhat.com>
> > To: Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com>
> > Cc: openstack-tc at 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 at markwash.net <mailto:mark.washenberger at 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-for-scheduler
> > 
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/deploy-vcenter-templates-from-vmware-nova-driver
> > 
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/esx-resource-pools-as-compute-nodes
> > 
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/multiple-clusters-managed-by-one-service
> > 
> > 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+header
> > >>
> > >>     _______________________________________________
> > >>     OpenStack-TC mailing list
> > >>     OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> > >>     <mailto:OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org>
> > >>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> OpenStack-TC mailing list
> > >> OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
> > >>
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > OpenStack-TC mailing list
> > > OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Russell Bryant
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-TC mailing list
> > OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> legal-discuss mailing list
> legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss