aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache Aries (Incubating) v0.1 release candidate #2
Date Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:41:22 GMT
Yep, after recent discussions about this on the Geronimo lists, we'll be
updating the text in the OpenJPA licenses for our next set of release


On 4/27/10 5:43 PM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 27 April 2010 15:51, Kevan Miller <> wrote:
>> On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>> On 27 April 2010 14:42, Kevan Miller <> wrote:
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>> I realized that I failed to review a few things. Can you give me a few hours?
>>> sure, I was hoping to get 3 IPMC binding +1s before calling the vote.
>>> We have 2 - Guillaume and you at the moment and Dims has just told me
>>> he'll ping me back later today.
>> So reviewing a Geronimo release (which had this same issue) made me come back and
take a look at Aries.
>> For dual license files like: jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/resources/org/apache/aries/jpa/container/parsing/impl/persistence.xsd.rsrc
>> I believe we should be including both licenses (as explained in the header of the
files). We are currently only including the CDDL license (this may have been my mistake --
in saying the LICENSE information in the RC1 jar file was correct...). I think we should be
including the full license text from (i.e.
both licenses), then choosing the CDDL license in the NOTICE file.
>> If we were only including the CDDL license in the RC1 jar file, then I should have
caught this last time... Apologies.
>> If others agree, afraid we'll need to update...
> Is there a precedent for this? The recent 2.0.0 OpenJPA binary and
> source zip have a LICENSE.txt with just the CDDL in it, no GPL license
> text. Has this been discussed on a list somewhere - I couldn't see
> anything recently on legal-discuss@ - it seems there is some
> inconsistency.
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>> --kevan

View raw message