[forge-dev] Migrating Forge to the EPL license- how we can all help

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

I think that was me ;)

Do we need the file headers at all with the EPL?

/*
 * Copyright 2012 Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
 *
 * Licensed under the Eclipse Public License version 1.0,
 * available at http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html
 */

~Lincoln

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Just a note on that license notice:
>
> There's nothing inherently wrong with that - it's the Apache License
> 2.0 standard notice recommended by the ASF but with the EPL
> substituted as the license.
>
> However, I recently recommended to a developer of a new EPL-licensed
> JBoss-related project to use a simpler notice:
>
>
>   Copyright 2012 Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
>
>   Licensed under the Eclipse Public License version 1.0, available at
>   http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html
>
>
> That would be my recommendation here, just because we don't have any
> true standard and simpler legal notices seem preferable.
>
> (Substitute another copyright holder if appropriate, but for Red
> Hat-copyrighted source files use "Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates"
> as above.)
>
> I dis-recommended the notice commonly used by Eclipse Foundation
> projects, for any of you who've seen those, because I find them
> annoying and they are not quite a 'standard'.
>
> - Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 03:17:32PM -0400, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > Thanks for "volunteering" to help with the EPL license effort.
> >
> > The first thing we should do to get started migrating the Forge license
> is each
> > choose module(s) that we'd like to help migrate. Simply reply here with
> the
> > forge/core module you are taking on, and we will try not to overlap.
> >
> > Once you've chosen your module(s), we'll need to take the following
> steps.
> >
> >  1. In all of the source file, check the /** License */ header to ensure
> that
> >     the (c) Copyright is owned by JBoss.
> >
> >       □ If it is, replace the header with the following License:
> >
> >         /**
> >          * Copyright 2012 Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
> >          *
> >          * Licensed under the Eclipse Public License Version 1.0 (the
> >         "License");
> >          * you may not use this file except in compliance with the
> License.
> >          * You may obtain a copy of the License at
> >          *
> >          *     http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html
> >          *
> >          * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> software
> >          * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS"
> BASIS,
> >          * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express
> or
> >         implied.
> >          * See the License for the specific language governing
> permissions and
> >          * limitations under the License.
> >          */
> >
> >       □ If it is not, then record the name of the file and at the end of
> your
> >         review, send a list of all such files discovered as a reply to
> this
> >         thread so that we can review the necessary actions to take (most
> likely
> >         no action will be required, and we will simply leave the header
> in
> >         tact.)
> >
> >  2. Send your changes as a pull request for review.
> >
> >  3. Another committer will review your pull request and merge the
> changes. Note
> >     - please DO NOT merge your own pull requests. We should have at
> least two
> >     sets of eyes reviewing each license change. We don't want to get this
> >     wrong!
> >
> >  4. Drink beer.
> >
> > Thanks folks! Let the re-licensing begin!
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Baxter, III
> > http://ocpsoft.org
> > "Simpler is better."
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20120810/3669b1b9/attachment.html