[Nfd-dev] License boilerplate for code imported from NFD to ndn-cxx

[Alex Afanasyev]

I don't think there is anything else that we need to put in either README-dev of wiki.
README-dev already includes correct information, merely suggesting to use the boilerplate for LGPL license.

---
Alex

On Oct 5, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Junxiao Shi <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu> wrote:

> Hi Alex
> 
> Please include those rules in README-dev.md or on a wiki page.
> 
> Yours, Junxiao
> 
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Alex Afanasyev <alexander.afanasyev at ucla.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Oct 5, 2014, at 6:54 PM, Davide Pesavento <davide.pesavento at lip6.fr> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Junxiao Shi
> > <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu> wrote:
> >> Dear folks
> >>
> >> Sometimes, code needs to be imported from NFD to ndn-cxx, for functional and
> >> technical reasons.
> >>
> >> Strictly speaking, NFD code cannot be imported to ndn-cxx directly.
> >> NFD is GPL3; ndn-cxx is LGPL3.
> >> LGPL3 code cannot contain GPL3 code.
> >>
> >> The guideline given in ndn-cxx README-dev.md is to include a LGPL3 license
> >> boilerplate for all contributions.
> >
> > I'm assuming that guideline refers only to new code (it's the only way
> > in which it can make sense). In this case you're not the sole author
> > of the code that you committed, therefore the guideline does not
> > apply.
> 
> Guidelines are not the law, they are just guidelines that we recommend to use for our code.  Nothing more.
> One can disagree with guidelines and add something else, which is compatible with the library's or NFD's license in general.
> 
> In this specific case, as Davide pointed out, we are required by the law to preserve the original copyright.  Technically speaking, we will need agreement with each copyright holder to change the license, but I hope this is not an issue at the moment.
> 
> Again, for this specific case.  We should preserve the original copyright that was in NFD and explicitly list contributing authors (as there is no other place where they are listed).  I think we still can use the the generic ndn-cxx boilerplate, the original stuff can be put as a separate comment block in files.
> 
> ---
> Alex
> 
> >> Davide is disagreeing with this practice in a code review.
> >
> > I don't disagree with it in general. I disagree with what you did in
> > change #1288.
> >
> > IANAL, but applying this "practice" in this case is wrong and
> > constitutes a gross violation of copyright law, for two reasons.
> >
> > 1. You are relicensing code from GPL to LGPL. This requires explicit
> > approval from every copyright holder (i.e. author) of the code that is
> > being relicensed.
> >
> > 2. You dropped all copyright holders except "The Regents of University
> > of California". I believe this is a violation of the GPLv3.
> >
> > Best,
> > Davide
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nfd-dev mailing list
> > Nfd-dev at lists.cs.ucla.edu
> > http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20141006/d5a55d06/attachment.html>