[License-discuss] Fwd: Yet another question about using libraries with different licensed in OSS

[Alex Rousskov]

On 01/18/2017 10:33 AM, Massimo Zaniboni wrote:
> GPL and Apache License require explicitely to put an header file in each
> source code file with:

AFAIK, neither GPL nor Apache license actually _require_ this. You may
have missed the "END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS" markers when reading the
corresponding web pages.


> - the AUTHORS (but not who made typos/small bug-fixes)

Yes, and a committee of lawyers that determine whether a given
contribution warrants adding its author to the source code file(s) plus
a dedicated group of developers that have nothing better to do but move
author lines from one source file to another when the code is
reshuffled. And an Oracle that remembers who wrote what and removes no
longer valid author entries as the code gets deleted. Oh, and do not
forget a small group of assistants that change all those duplicated
author emails when author employer changes (while following up with the
old employer for a permission to change competitorA.com emails to
competitorB.com emails in sources).</sarcasm>


> - a short version of the license terms

There is no "short version" of GPL or Apache terms. What folks often put
in source code files is a reference to a document that contains the
actual license(s). It is up to each project to determine the exact text
of that reference, keeping various official recommendations (i.e., the
stuff _after_ TERMS AND CONDITIONS) and the number of applicable
licenses in mind.

Alex.