<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>Junxiao,</div><div><br></div><div>Please, don't make an issue from a non-issue. The license (and license boilerplate) is in itself instructions on how code can be used, re-used, and moved around. There is noting special that needs to be added.</div><div><br></div><div>For the cases you're referring to. This is the point of code review, when you noticed that boilerplate is not the one we usually use / incorrect copyright/license attribute. There is no guidelines, rather you just need to tell what is the right way. That's it.</div><div><br></div><div>Licenses are pretty simple to read (at least the boilerplate) and it is important for everybody to understand the limitations of the licenses.</div><div><br></div><div>---</div><div>Alex</div><br><div><div>On Oct 12, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Junxiao Shi <<a href="mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu">shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Hi Davide<div><br></div><div>Developers are not lawyers. License is to be interpreted by a lawyer. Requiring consulting a lawyer every time importing NFD code is counter-productive.</div><div>The guideline should be some mechanical steps that developers could easily follow.</div><div><br></div><div>Note the scope of this discussion is specifically for importing code from NFD, and probably NLSR and repo-ng.</div><div>I agree that importing code from an external project should involve consulting with a lawyer.</div><div><br></div><div>Yours, Junxiao<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Davide Pesavento <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:davide.pesavento@lip6.fr" target="_blank">davide.pesavento@lip6.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Well then maybe the first rule should be: read (and understand) the<br>
license of the code you're touching/using.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Davide<br>
<br><span class="im HOEnZb">> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
> From: Jiewen Tan <<a href="mailto:alanwake@ucla.edu">alanwake@ucla.edu</a>><br>
> Date: Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:53 PM<br>><br>
> Hi All,<br>
><br>
> I am the owner. I do agree with Junxiao there should be a guideline,<br>
> otherwise new people like me will be confused while importing codes.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Jiewen Tan<br>
><br>
> On Oct 11, 2014, at 11:09 PM, Junxiao Shi <<a href="mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu">shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Dear folks<br>
><br>
> There needs a guideline on how to write license boilerplate for code<br>
> imported from NFD to ndn-cxx.<br>
> The necessity of such a guideline is illustrated by<br>
> <a href="http://gerrit.named-data.net/1254" target="_blank">http://gerrit.named-data.net/1254</a> where the Change Owner fails to produce a<br>
> correct license boilerplate in 3 patchsets.<br>
><br>
> Yours, Junxiao<br>
><br></span></blockquote></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>Nfd-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Nfd-dev@lists.cs.ucla.edu">Nfd-dev@lists.cs.ucla.edu</a><br>http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>