Allowing TAPs that are licensed with MIT or Apache 2.0? about taps

[joshuagl]

Should we be updating the TAP process (TAP 1 & 2) to request TAPs are either explicitly labeled as placed in the public domain (see this TAP as an example) or licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License?

Thus removing the use of the Open Publication License for new TAPs?

[erickt]

1. Unfortunately I am not qualified to answer on the pros and cons of dual licensing. Does CNCF has resources to help answer that kind of question?
2. For my purposes, I wouldn't needed the change to be retroactive. I would just prefer to use one or the other to post new TAPs.

[erickt]

@trishankatdatadog I don't currently have approval to submit changes under Open Publication License, but I do with MIT or Apache 2.0. It would be convenient for me to avoid having to seek approval from work. Also pre-approved are creative commons licenses like CC-By if that's more appropriate.

[caniszczyk]

The CNCF IP policy requires code to be Apache v2.0 and docs under CC-BY:

https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/master/charter.md#11-ip-policy

If dual licensing this as Apache v2.0 + CC-BY works for you that's fine (even though it isn't code per se).

[erickt]

Note that Rust dual licenses their RFCs with MIT and Apache 2.0, and Swift and Kubernetes license their extensions with Apache 2.0.

[trishankatdatadog]

A few questions:

1. What are the pros and cons of dual-licensing?
2. Would this apply retrospectively? Presumably not, and that is probably fine.

[trishankatdatadog]

Understood. For my curiosity's sake, would you please explain why you would prefer one license over another?

[mnm678]

cc @JustinCappos

[trishankatdatadog]

Got it, thanks for the explanation, Eric!

[JustinCappos]

I'm not savvy enough to know how to answer this. I think we should ask folks at the CNCF for advice. I'm looping in Chris A who hopefully can help to direct this.

…

On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 3:15 AM Erick Tryzelaar ***@***.***> wrote: @trishankatdatadog <https://github.com/trishankatdatadog> I don't currently have approval to submit changes under Open Publication License, but I do with MIT or Apache 2.0. It would be convenient for me to avoid having to seek approval from work. Also pre-approved are creative commons licenses like CC-By <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/> if that's more appropriate. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#126 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGROD4QUVXRA22SUIMJMHLSJ5OLHANCNFSM4SKJIHGQ> .

[erickt]

@JustinCappos: Good morning! Has there been any word from Chris A?

[JustinCappos]

There hasn't. Adding Amye and pinging again...

…

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 1:45 AM Erick Tryzelaar ***@***.***> wrote: @JustinCappos <https://github.com/JustinCappos>: Good morning! Has there been any word from Chris A? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#126 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGROD2NHLYWCNO5VFTED7LSLR3MLANCNFSM4SKJIHGQ> .