[legal-discuss] [Fwd: [openstack-dev] Call for a clear COPYRIGHT-HOLDERS file in all OpenStack projects (and [trove] python-troveclient_0.1.4-1_amd64.changes REJECTED)]

Richard Fontana rfontana at redhat.com
Tue Oct 22 02:49:00 UTC 2013

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 01:16:31AM +0100, Monty Taylor wrote:
> - We should not include the text of the CLA in our tarballs as was
> suggested. There are several reasons for this, most of which that I do
> not feel it's necessary, and the rest of them having to do with the fact
> that I still feel that our CLA is pointless and kind of embarrasing.

It would certainly be strange to include the text of the CLA in the

I took a look at some Debian 'copyright' files for ASF projects, which
are somewhat similar to OpenStack legally. I can only conclude that
either the FTP master in question here is misinterpreting the Debian
project's guidelines, or that OpenStack is being held to a stricter
standard than other multiple-copyright-holder projects packaged in
Debian. (There seemed to be a hint in the thread on openstack-dev that
this might be intentionally so, because OpenStack is 'new'?)

- RF

More information about the legal-discuss mailing list