Question about the copyright holder

[Noritada Kobayashi]

Hi,

I just started packaging serf for Debian, expecting this library will
be more useful for users. Before that, I have a question: who/what is
the copyright holder for serf? The NOTICE file says that this software
is developed by the Apache Software Foundation, meaning the Foundation
is the copyright holder. However, all of *.c and *.h files have
headers saying Justin Erenkrantz and Greg Stein hold the copyright.
Which is correct and what should I call the upstream authors?

Since I am not a lawyer, I may have some mistakes in interpreting the
copyright notice. If so, I'm sorry.

Thanks,

-nori

[Justin Erenkrantz]

Short answer: The core copyright holders are myself and Greg - all
contributors (incl. myself and Greg) have licensed their contributions
under the Apache License version 2.

Long answer: Serf has an interesting history. =)

Serf originally started out as an Apache project - however, at the
time, it wasn't a good fit within the ASF (and got kicked around
internally within the foundation), so Greg and I as the sole
contributors to the code at that time, took the code elsewhere to
webdav.org and took our copyright with us. We've since moved it here
to Google Code. The mention in NOTICE to the ASF is a reference to
that time, but it isn't a copyright claim.

At the point where we get a decent enough community around Serf, we'll
bring Serf back to Apache. Greg and I are currently Directors of The
Apache Software Foundation, so we probably know how to do that. =)
We have continued to ensure that all people who have commit access to
Serf have signed CLAs with the ASF and do so with the knowledge that
Serf will one day return to Apache and their contributions will be
under the ALv2 (or whatever license the ASF uses at that time) - so
when we want to move Serf back 'home' to Apache, we have all of the
legal paperwork in place to do so cleanly.

I hope this helps to clarify things.

Thanks! -- justin

[Noritada Kobayashi]

Hi,

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > I just started packaging serf for Debian, expecting this library will
> > be more useful for users. Before that, I have a question: who/what is
> > the copyright holder for serf? The NOTICE file says that this software
> > is developed by the Apache Software Foundation, meaning the Foundation
> > is the copyright holder. However, all of *.c and *.h files have
> > headers saying Justin Erenkrantz and Greg Stein hold the copyright.
> > Which is correct and what should I call the upstream authors?
>

> Short answer: The core copyright holders are myself and Greg - all
> contributors (incl. myself and Greg) have licensed their contributions
> under the Apache License version 2.
>
> Long answer: Serf has an interesting history. =)
>

[snip]

>
> I hope this helps to clarify things.

Thank you very much for politely answering my question so soon. Your
explanation did help me!! It explained all I wanted to know and now I
also understand the background: when someone asks similar questions
about the package, I will be able to answer it. :-)

Best regards,

-nori

[gst...@gmail.com]

Please feel free to submit any patches necessary for packaging serf
into Debian. As I recall, it seems typical to have a debian/
subdirectory to hold packaging bits. Is that right?

Thanks,
-g

On Dec 20, 10:30 am, "Noritada Kobayashi" <norita...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > > I just started packaging serf for Debian, expecting this library will
> > > be more useful for users. Before that, I have a question: who/what is
> > > the copyright holder for serf? The NOTICE file says that this software
> > > is developed by the Apache Software Foundation, meaning the Foundation
> > > is the copyright holder. However, all of *.c and *.h files have
> > > headers saying Justin Erenkrantz and Greg Stein hold the copyright.
> > > Which is correct and what should I call the upstream authors?
>
> > Short answer: The core copyright holders are myself and Greg - all
> > contributors (incl. myself and Greg) have licensed their contributions
> > under the Apache License version 2.
>
> > Long answer: Serf has an interesting history. =)
>
> [snip]
>

> > I hope this helps to clarify things.Thank you very much for politely answering my question so soon. Your

[Noritada Kobayashi]

Yes, right. The debian subdirectory and its contents is necessary for
building packages from source.

However, we usually maintain that directory outside upstream's
repository, maybe because packaging cycles are shorter than upstream
release cycles: we first create a package based on a certain upstream
release (e.g. 0.1.0-1) and add some tweaks, including applying patches
to source code, to improve the package (e.g. 0.1.0-2, 0.1.0-3, ...).
Putting the debian subdirectory into the source code (and into the
tarball) normally means the packaging cycle is equal to the upstream
tarball's release cycle. For Debian-specific tools, it is not a
problem, but otherwise, it may be. :-)

So, I'll send patches other than the debian directory and useful for
everyone, such as fixes of source code, build files, and documents.

Many thanks,

-nori