batchee-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Kurz <>
Subject Re: Question on LICENSE(s) for certain modules
Date Tue, 06 Jan 2015 22:50:26 GMT
Thanks Romain and Mark for your responses.

I've been looking into this in more detail and reading through the ASF
guidance such as:

Let me please share another observation or two.

Though I do have specific points here I'm also writing to better understand
how the project sizes up and organizes its legal-related dependencies.

1) First, we've noted in this thread there are two types of binaries or
distributable pieces needing a LICENSE/NOTICE.

These are the Maven modules and the three assemblies (the .zip/.gz


That's all the binary distributables, right?

The LICENSE/NOTICE nested at the Maven module level is a convenient way to
write the correct files into the Maven modules, but maybe we need to go a
bit further for the assembly zips.

For one, I think that the more typical practice would be to write
LICENSE/NOTICE files directly to the archive's root, not merely in
one particular batchee-provided JAR parallel to other JARs in the zip root.

That seems more logical, more in line with what I recall seeing in general,
plus Tuscany seems to do that.

If so, and if b) and c) bundle and ship different content, it might be the
case that the LICENSE/NOTICE files for each are actually different.
(or they could be the same).

This would suggest maybe going beyond merely a module-scoped LICENSE/NOTICE
file and having a separate LICENSE/NOTICE for each distribution.

And obviously for a) the LICENSE/NOTICE would be about as simple as it gets
(maybe this is already done, not sure).

Do you agree?

Some other minor points:

2) I wonder if the JUNG LICENSE/NOTICE files are needed for the
tools/maven-plugin module?

These are not "shipped" or "bundled" in any Maven module or assembly, right?
The Apache doc such as:
seems pretty clear they don't need to be mentioned.

Maybe you were just "playing it safe".

3) Is the reference to the Airlift project in

This doesn't have the info at:

and this section
seems to say the only need to add to a NOTICE for an ASL 2 project is if
the project itself has its own notice.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message