- From: Hedge Hog <
>
- To: Adam Jacob <
>
- Cc:
- Subject: [chef] Re: Chef steps and licensing
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:55:43 +1100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Pw2mhKwG6Wgwjm0pdB4K6+dR76bq1XrKgWnQ+k6k2FjDZ74iajReG2V4lMx3VeN7Rw sm+ltd9d9UBw4seh7qCDMCODVLmHmCR+C2dW30rqVelTS2KZcPA+yDdNmdQWDNiP3ekt chmKjdtuRbSDbpB79jaJHHTGjpcR5n5IdvX6c=
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Adam Jacob
<
>
wrote:
>
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Hedge Hog
>
<
>
>
wrote:
>
> I've noticed some Chef step files have the opscode copyright and
>
> license header text, some don't.
>
> Given I'm refactoring some/many of these steps, I wonder what should
>
> be carried over in terms of licensing.
>
> To wit. A step gets split into a Cucumber step file and an API file.
>
> The API file contains the logic - often different from the Chef logic
>
> (e.g uses Aruba or custom methods) - sometimes following quite closely
>
> the original logic.
>
> The step description too is sometimes the same, different or just similar.
>
>
>
> So the questions. What do the various Authors and Opscode expect:
>
> - When the API logic is influenced by Chef's
>
> - When some of the step regexps are Chef's
>
> - When the original step file has no license/copyright text
>
>
>
> Essentially the issue seems to be that 'portions' of a file have come
>
> from, been influenced by the Opscode/Chef code.
>
>
You need to put attribution about the origins of some of the code in
>
the NOTICE file for your app. On an individual header, you can just
>
add yourself as an author/copyright holder. If the original step file
>
is lacking the license header, please let us know, so we can add one.
Many (all?) feature files seem to be unattributed in terms of Authorship.
Unless I hear otherwise I'll just add an Opscode copyright header to any
feature files I derive from these. Or do you want someone nominated
as the Author of these?
Cheers
>
Even in their absence, they are covered by the Apache 2 license.
>
>
> Yet it doesn't seem right that I can take the license/copyright text of
>
> say:
>
>
>
> # Author:: Adam Jacob
>
> (<
>)
>
> # Copyright:: Copyright (c) 2008 Opscode, Inc.
>
> # License:: Apache License, Version 2.0
>
> #
>
> etc
>
>
>
> and change it to arbitrarily assert that only portions of the file are
>
> now Authored by Adam Jacob copyright by Opscode.
>
>
>
> # Portions Authored:: Adam Jacob
>
> (<
>)
>
> # Portions Copyright:: Copyright (c) 2008 Opscode, Inc.
>
> # License:: Apache License, Version 2.0
>
> #
>
> etc
>
>
You can absolutely put some text in the header file saying that your
>
new work is based on the old work, and the original header is below.
>
>
> That is, it seem I need to get their agreement. And then the
>
> agreement of anyone else whose authorship/copyright I come across?
>
> Correct?
>
>
You can re-use the work without having to get the agreement of the
>
original authors, as long as you're not going to be changing the
>
licensing terms at all (ie: you release the final derived work as
>
Apache 2) *and* you don't modify the fact that the code you are
>
incorporating remains copyrighted by the original authors.
>
>
The Apache License grants these rights to those who receive a copy of
>
the software.
>
>
Happy to help,
>
Adam
>
>
--
>
Opscode, Inc.
>
Adam Jacob, Chief Product Officer
>
T: (206) 619-7151 E:
>
>
--
πόλλ' οἶδ ἀλώπηξ, ἀλλ' ἐχῖνος ἓν μέγα
[The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.]
Archilochus, Greek poet (c. 680 BC – c. 645 BC)
http://wiki.hedgehogshiatus.com
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.