Clarify license when using the templates #187
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@shrug Can you take a look at this? |
|
I'm actually curious why the PDK templates (as opposed to PDK itself) can't simply be released under a more permissive license (perhaps the patents clause is important to maintain?), but other than that I think this answers my question. |
scotje
previously approved these changes
May 21, 2019
When using the templates in their intended form through the PDK we do not want to add legal burden on the users. To clarify this, we note here that the rendering of the modules through the PDK already leaves enough traces (e.g. the `template-url` in `metadata.json`) that the conditions of section 4 (Redistribution) are met without any further action on the Licensor's side. I'll take this opportunity to also point out that the files rendered from the pdk-templates will remain Derivative Works of pdk-templates, e.g. for the purpose of section 3 (Grant of Patent License). Thanks to the specifics of the Apache 2.0 license this clearly does not extend to the main content of a module, either through "remaining separable" from the templated files, or through the fact that the templated result by itself (e.g. from `pdk new class`) does not pass the hurdle of being a significant work.
scotje
force-pushed
the
DavidS-license-clarification
branch
from
d22f2f2
to
55fb59b
Compare
rodjek
approved these changes
May 21, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When using the templates in their intended form through the PDK we do not want to add legal burden on the users. To clarify this, we note here that the rendering of the modules through the PDK already leaves enough traces (e.g. the
template-urlinmetadata.json) that the conditions of section 4 (Redistribution) are met without any further action on the Licensor's side.I'll take this opportunity to also point out that the files rendered from the pdk-templates will remain Derivative Works of pdk-templates, e.g. for the purpose of section 3 (Grant of Patent License). Thanks to the specifics of the Apache 2.0 license this clearly does not extend to the main content of a module, either through "remaining separable" from the templated files, or through the fact that the templated result by itself (e.g. from
pdk new class) does not pass the hurdle of being a significant work.