openstack-qa-team team mailing list archive

[Daryl Walleck <daryl.walleck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gotcha, that makes sense. Thanks!

Daryl
________________________________________
From: annegentle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [annegentle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Anne Gentle [anne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:28 PM
To: Daryl Walleck
Cc: openstack-qa-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Openstack-qa-team] Question about licensing header

Hi Daryl -

As I understand it (and I am not a lawyer), the Apache2 license
affords copyright assignment to the committer. It is correct to have a
header with a copyright from the company for which you worked at the
time of contribution. See
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply.

For the Apache Software Foundation projects, Apache asks that they do
not add copyright statements to their header files. OpenStack projects
do not have such a policy statement that I know of.

Hope this helps!
Anne

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Daryl Walleck
<daryl.walleck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> While I was doing some assorted maintenance on the Nova tests tonight, I
> noticed some inconsistencies in the license header of time files. While most
> attribute the work to OpenStack, LLC, I also see some where IBM is mentioned
> instead. I'm guessing this might be a copy/paste error, or are individual
> organizations supposed to be attributing themselves for their submissions?
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team
> Post to     : openstack-qa-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>