diff options
| author | Wayne Beaton | 2018-02-09 18:48:26 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Wayne Beaton | 2018-02-09 18:48:26 +0000 |
| commit | 318e69edaf83b834ca820038be935ab54c189628 (patch) | |
| tree | 9773999fe8b47078346f494d67e5a1f8bf97db76 | |
| parent | 8964480eeb3195c4fef6f0a00ef8520cea33ca74 (diff) | |
| download | org.eclipse.dash.handbook-318e69edaf83b834ca820038be935ab54c189628.tar.gz org.eclipse.dash.handbook-318e69edaf83b834ca820038be935ab54c189628.tar.xz org.eclipse.dash.handbook-318e69edaf83b834ca820038be935ab54c189628.zip | |
Add an FAQ entry regarding how we express combined licenses.
| -rw-r--r-- | source/chapters/legaldoc.adoc | 4 |
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/source/chapters/legaldoc.adoc b/source/chapters/legaldoc.adoc index 62fbe58..0503ca8 100644 --- a/source/chapters/legaldoc.adoc +++ b/source/chapters/legaldoc.adoc @@ -323,6 +323,10 @@ What licenses should be listed in a build script (e.g. Maven `pom.xml` file)?:: The license(s) in the build should reflect what is being built, but typically not the license(s) of referenced third party content. The `pom.xml` file for project code, for example, should list the project license(s). +In a multiple license scenario, do we use conjunction (`AND`) or disjunction (`OR`)?:: + +We follow the lead of the https://spdx.org/[SPDX community] with regard to the way in which we express the combination of licenses, and use inclusive disjunction. In the example of a dual licensing scenario, we make the content available under the terms of licenses A *AND* B, but the consumer accepts it under the terms of license A *OR* B or both. Think of it from the perspective of the consumer. + How do I get help?:: If you have any questions or concerns, contact mailto:{legalEmail}[{legalEmail}].
\ No newline at end of file |