On 12/01/2014 12:34 PM, František Dvořák wrote:
I'm packaging a ruby gem under Apache 2.0 license, and I asked upstream
to include license text file, pointing to LicensingGuidelines at .
Upstream developer has a questions, I don't know how to answer :
"Do you require the license text only in the git repository as a
LICENSE.txt file or also as part of the gem bundle? I assume I don't
need the full Apache 2.0 license, but simply the extract that can be
found at the bottom of this project's README. Is that correct?"
Is the brief "extract" at end of the  enough for gems (and I can
include full text in the Fedora package)? In many projects the gem
archive use to contain only the ruby files, to be as small as possible.
The Apache license requires:
"You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a
copy of this License;"
That means it needs to come with the work. If you distribute a binary
object of an Apache 2.0 licensed work, it better come with a copy of the
Apache 2.0 license. Thus, if you're distributing by gem, a full copy of
the license should be in the gem. If the ruby files are human readable,
I suppose a copy of the license text could be embedded inside them, but
my recommendation would be to simply include it as a txt file.
Thus, to answer upstream's questions (in order):
1) Also as part of the gem bundle.
2) You assume incorrectly, a fully copy of the license is required.
Red Hat University Outreach