[Openstack-devel] python-warlock_0.4.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> writes:
> On 01/31/2013 02:01 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> there is no statement in the upstream source that the files are actually
>> licensed under the terms of the Apache license.
>
> Are you *sure*? There's a LICENSE file together with the upstream source
> code. Since you don't have the package anymore, please check for it here:

I saw the LICENSE file, however including the text of the Apache 2.0
license doesn't mean that the project is licensed under the Apache
license.

In fact the Apache license even requires an explicit copyright notice in
the license text itself:

----
      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
----

So what is missing is something similar to this:

----
   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.

      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
      identification within third-party archives.

   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]

   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
   You may obtain a copy of the License at

       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
   limitations under the License.
----

> There's no requirement in Debian that the license is written in each and
> every source file as much as I know.

No, though that is very nice to have.

Ansgar