❦ 2 janvier 2018 10:42 -0800, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> :
>>> Apache 2.0 requires distributing any NOTICE file along with derivative
>>> works, but this is easy to forget. In many cases, we have effectively
>>> the same information in debian/copyright, but even if this is the case
>>> for a specific release, it's not guaranteed to stay the case in the
>>> future and it's easy to forget to check.
>
>> The license says notice can be provided with the source form: "within
>> the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative
>> Works". IMO, that's already what we do as this is how we comply with
>> GPL-like licenses.
>
> We currently allow distribution of a binary-package-only Debian image
> along with a written offer of source or, for non-commercial distribution,
> a simple pointer to the Debian source archives. This complies with the
> GPL but wouldn't, at least by my reading, comply with the Apache 2.0
> license unless we include the NOTICE files in binary packages. (Which is
> fairly trivial to do -- in fact, I wonder if we should just solve this
> problem in debhelper and add NOTICE to the default debhelper
> dh_installdocs whitelist.)
Except for cases where the whole work is not under Apache license, only
part of it. In this case, the NOTICE file may not be at the
root. License also says documentation is fine, so debian/copyright could
be enough.
--
Write clearly - don't sacrifice clarity for "efficiency".
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature