Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of flamefew@gmail.com designates
 209.85.146.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=bUnFr/Y0H65b99PfdvoFsefcbPeFhka04C7/Dhs5FKam3gD/yvDwAsgEHQfX4xRTigSrV8wOqcn9QKhLf173fKoWeWCNbuYb2tYiMJpooFXnCpX5E2WvwBpmyLabsiABaL7YOHif6E2j0iBnSYgWuFmTJAFUm5CJcFV+vPfF9EI=
Message-ID: <31cc37360801102325r49d62f9ctcd7b25e7d82680de@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:25:41 -0800
From: "Henri Yandell" <flamefew@gmail.com>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [IO] Planning IO 1.4 release
In-Reply-To: <25aac9fc0801100901n5734d06atf07ffa2d2dfed565@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <191539.44918.qm@web86511.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
	 <25aac9fc0801100832x55890248k6ef511e1473478f8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <55afdc850801100839m383f1dfh95b90b1382667093@mail.gmail.com>
	 <25aac9fc0801100901n5734d06atf07ffa2d2dfed565@mail.gmail.com>

On Jan 10, 2008 9:01 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> AIUI, the NOTICE file is not about dependencies, it is about the
> artefacts that are actually included in the distribution.

Absolutely correct, I interpret as being about the copyright in our
source, not things we redistribute. And given we don't even
redistribute dependencies... even less important.

I think it's definitely true that you could put the NOTICE files from
the dependencies in the NOTICE, and concatenate the LICENSEs from the
dependencies onto the LICENSE file; and if this were a GPL C project
then I would be tempted to do just that. In Java we get to
redistribute binaries and so I think it's cleaner to put the
license/notice files next to the redistributed jars.

> In the case of Commons, dependencies are normally not included in the
> distribution, and should therefore not be included in NOTICE.

+1000. It's plain wrong.

> Indeed, I suspect that most (possibly all) Commons distributions need
> the same NOTICE file - the only difference being the initial copyright
> year.
>
> Or have I missed something here?

Look at Common EL's NOTICE. Look at Apache HTTP Server's LICENSE.

Both files should not be the same; and the final copyright year
shouldn't either (ie: just because you build in 2008, doesn't
magically give us 2008 as a latest copyright year).

Making LICENSE/NOTICE inclusion easier is a good idea - but the
mrr-plugin has solved it wrong as far as I can tell. We should solve
it ourselves by making all components pull the same filenames into the
jars we want them to go into (binary/source/javadoc).

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org