[License-discuss] Proposal: Apache Third Party License Policy

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

Thanks, without the context it was somewhat harder to follow on license-discuss.

Consider this a vote in the negative as a non-member user of Apache software. If I have to start checking every Apache package for GPL code I'll have to strongly recommend that we approach all Apache packages with caution.

Becoming a "universal acceptor" significantly impacts your ability to be a "universal donor".  I have no desire to accidentally be the cause of any organization I work for becoming the test case for what is an aggregation vs what is a derivative.  If Apache was willing to indemnify downstream users...yah, I didn't think so.

Nice try though.

From: "lrosen at rosenlaw.com<mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com>" <lrosen at rosenlaw.com<mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com>>
Reply-To: "members at apache.org<mailto:members at apache.org>" <members at apache.org<mailto:members at apache.org>>, "lrosen at rosenlaw.com<mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com>" <lrosen at rosenlaw.com<mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com>>, License Discuss <license-discuss at opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss at opensource.org>>
Date: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 10:16 PM
To: License Discuss <license-discuss at opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss at opensource.org>>
Subject: [License-discuss] Proposal: Apache Third Party License Policy

[This has been a hellishly long thread on private Apache lists before the board cut off discussion on revised policies. Below was the short start of it I submitted over two weeks ago. Apache board members don't want to revise current policy. Many Apache members don't want it. Still, it is a serious proposal to bring some more freedom and cooperation to open source. Please treat this as a political document for license-discuss at . /Larry]

...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20150527/f33f1cfd/attachment.html>