Open Stack

Thanks for the reply Jeremy, that was my instinct too. I'll keep my -2 on
the review in question, but I'll wait for legal to chime in before asking
the author to abandon the patch.

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> On 2016-09-27 11:29:26 -0400 (-0400), Steve Martinelli wrote:
> > I recently came across a patch [1] that is trying to add the Apache
> license
> > to an autogenerated file.
> [...]
> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/377170/1
> [...]
>
> If there is a license to that file, then it's almost certainly a BSD
> license (derived from Sphinx's quickstart.py):
>
>     https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/blob/master/sphinx/quickstart.py
>
> I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not keen on adding licenses to
> autogenerated (e.g. non-source) files where the original authors of
> the generator didn't design it to emit a license in its output to
> begin with. I would argue that the copy in our cookiecutter repo, as
> a derivative of the sphinx-quickstart output, should probably never
> have started out with an Apache license header in the first place (I
> wonder whether it was added to satisfy "Python scripts without a
> declared license" checks in one of our static analyzers?).
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160928/2363b5e6/attachment.html>