From c2e78cba9491cecde242d3803f431382a87b9eef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Roman Shaposhnik Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:05:26 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Getting a section to the README clarifying licensing implication --- README.md | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 9730a73602..8558a266f0 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -373,6 +373,26 @@ CLA if they fall under the rubric of [obvious fixes](https://cla.pivotal.io/abou However, since our GitHub workflow checks for CLA by default you may find it easier to submit one instead of claiming an "obvious fix" exception. +### Licensing of Greenplum contributions + +If the contribution you're submitting is original work, you can assume that Pivotal +will release it as part of an overall Greenplum release available to the downstream +consumers under the Apache License, Version 2.0. However, in addition to that, Pivotal +may also decide to release it under a different license (such as [PostgreSQL License](https://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/) to the upstream consumers that require it. A typical example here would be Pivotal +upstreaming your contribution back to PostgreSQL community (which can be done either +verbatim or your contribution being upstreamed as part of the larger changeset). + +If the contribution you're submitting is NOT original work you have to indicate the name +of the license and also make sure that it is similar in terms to the Apache License 2.0. +Apache Software Foundation maintains a list of these licenses under [Category A](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a). In addition to that, you may be required to make proper attribution in the +[NOTICE file](https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/master/NOTICE) file similar to [these examples](https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/master/NOTICE#L278). + +Finally, keep in mind that it is NEVER a good idea to remove licensing headers from +the work that is not your original one. Even if you are using parts of the file that +originally had a licensing header at the top you should err on the side of preserving it. +As always, if you are no quite sure about the licensing implications of your contributions +feel free to reach out to us on the developer mailing list. + ### Coding guidelines Your chances of getting feedback and seeing your code merged into the project -- GitLab