[forge-dev] Migrating Forge to the EPL license- how we can all help
Lincoln Baxter, III
lincolnbaxter at gmail.com
Mon Aug 13 11:36:54 EDT 2012
Please assign yourself the modules you are working on!
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-580
Thanks,
Lincoln
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok guys, update:
>
> Let's take Richard's advice and go with:
>
> /*
> * 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
> */
>
> Sorry if you've already replaced a few files! I just want to make sure we
> do this right.
> ~Lincoln
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
> lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Good question. For now, link to the file in github here (or say which
>> file it is) so we can investigate :)
>>
>> Thanks!
>> ~Lincoln
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 1:34 PM, jdbjunior at gmail.com <jdbjunior at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Lincoln, what about files with no license header. Add the header?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Lincoln Baxter, III
>>> <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > 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."
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > forge-dev mailing list
>>> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lincoln Baxter, III
>> http://ocpsoft.org
>> "Simpler is better."
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/20120813/fc93b113/attachment.html
More information about the forge-dev
mailing list