Task #1723
Updated by Cesar Ordiñana about 13 years ago
Tasks to perform:
h1. Library/Component Review Process
# List any external components that are included "in the source tree" for the project.
# List all external dependencies with:
* Potentially problematic license terms (all non-free libraries, for instance).
* All libraries with licenses that might conflict (for instance GDAL's use of GPL'ed GRASS libraries in the non-GPL GDAL).
h1. Code Copyright Review
# Does the file include the license information? If not, add it if there there is no ambiguity about whether the standard project license applies. If that is not obvious, make notes in the review document.
# Is the file under the normal project license? If not, make notes in the review document.
# Is there anything obviously unusual about the origin of the code? Does this pose any conflicts? Is the issue properly described in the source file? For instance, in GDAL, the gdal/port/cpl_strtod.cpp file is closely derived from external code that was placed in the public domain. cpl_strtod.cpp is placed under the normal GDAL MIT/X license, but detailed notes are kept in the header text on it's origin, the fact that this was public domain and so the fact that it is ok to relicense it. Oddities should be noted in the source file itself and in the review document.
# Maintain a list of all copyright holders identified in the Provenance Review Document. This list is essentially everyone who would need to agree to relicense the project. It may be desirable to seek copyright assignment to a "project lead", or to the foundation to reduce the number of copyright holders for the project, although this is not required.
h1. Library/Component Review Process
# List any external components that are included "in the source tree" for the project.
# List all external dependencies with:
* Potentially problematic license terms (all non-free libraries, for instance).
* All libraries with licenses that might conflict (for instance GDAL's use of GPL'ed GRASS libraries in the non-GPL GDAL).
h1. Code Copyright Review
# Does the file include the license information? If not, add it if there there is no ambiguity about whether the standard project license applies. If that is not obvious, make notes in the review document.
# Is the file under the normal project license? If not, make notes in the review document.
# Is there anything obviously unusual about the origin of the code? Does this pose any conflicts? Is the issue properly described in the source file? For instance, in GDAL, the gdal/port/cpl_strtod.cpp file is closely derived from external code that was placed in the public domain. cpl_strtod.cpp is placed under the normal GDAL MIT/X license, but detailed notes are kept in the header text on it's origin, the fact that this was public domain and so the fact that it is ok to relicense it. Oddities should be noted in the source file itself and in the review document.
# Maintain a list of all copyright holders identified in the Provenance Review Document. This list is essentially everyone who would need to agree to relicense the project. It may be desirable to seek copyright assignment to a "project lead", or to the foundation to reduce the number of copyright holders for the project, although this is not required.