Introduce the Apache License #150
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Alexander Greene <[email protected]>
| same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier | ||
| identification within third-party archives. | ||
|
|
||
| Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need to specify the copyright information?
| Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] | |
| Copyright 2023 Operator Framework |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nevermind, I realize now that is part of the section you apply to the top of each file :)
Is there going to be a separate PR to add the copyright information to all the files?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 we should probably put the copyright info in source code headers.
And we should also probably have a sanity test that checks for the license headers. That could probably be a follow-up though.
tmshort
left a comment
tmshort
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This appears to be identical to the Apache license provided by GitHub when you add a license as your initial commit to a repository.
I also compared it to the apache online version at https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt, and with the exception of a single blank line at the beginning, they are identical.
I will note that OpenSSL is Apache 2.0 licensed, but their license differs:
- The URL at the top is
httpvshttps - They don't have the APPENDIX
4 participants
No description provided.