commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Digester 3.2 based on RC1
Date Fri, 09 Dec 2011 18:44:46 GMT
On 9 December 2011 18:38, Simone Tripodi <simonetripodi@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> There are two aspects to this.
>>
>> 1) Does the artifact actually included the 3rd party code?
>> If not, then it should not be mentioned at all.
>>
>
> it does not include the 3rd party source code, only the binary
> artifact - and it has to be mentioned because, as reported in their
> license,
>
>> "2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
>>   notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
>>   documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution."
>>
>> where "the above copyright notice" is
>>
>>  Copyright (c) 2000-2011 INRIA, France Telecom
>>  All rights reserved.
>
> what is actually missing, is the disclaimer

By inclusion, I meant source or binary.
But in both cases the license must be included in LICENSE file.

http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses

>> 2) If the artifact does *include* the code, then the LICENSE must be
>> included, and if the license says so, there must be a mention in the
>> NOTICE file.
>>
>> Every mention in the NOTICE file should have a corresponding entry in
>> the LICENSE file; not every license requires a mention in the NOTICE
>> file.
>>
>> In this case, there need to be two sets of N&L files - one for the
>> shaded jar, which mention the additional included components, and
>> another for the rest, which are presumably ASF code only.
>>
>> Looks like it would be easy enough to include specific N&L files in
>> the shaded jar; if not, maybe use a separate Maven module to do the
>> shading and hold the N&L files?
>>
>
> separate maven module? no thank you, that would be insane, it is a
> large amount of unnecessary work. 1000 times better dropping the über
> jar and make everybody happy instead.

It's up to you, but it looks easy enough to change the jarjar
parameters to include the appropriate N&L files.

>>>>
>>>> Ideally the LICENSE file should also state that AL 2.0 applies to CGLIB.
>>>>
>>>
>>> isn't it more enough mention 3rd parties in the NOTICE file?
>>
>> No, LICENSES are also needed.
>>
>
> can be easily achieved
>
>>
>> I mean, after the AL license, one can put:
>>
>> APACHE COMMONS DIGESTER SUBCOMPONENTS:
>>
>> The Apache Commons Digester with-deps jar ncludes a number of subcomponents with
>> separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the source
>> code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
>> conditions of the following licenses.
>>
>> For the CGLIB component (http://cglib.sourceforge.net/)
>> This is licensed under the AL 2.0, see above
>>
>> For the ASM component (http://asm.ow2.org/):
>> [include the license here]
>>
>> See for example:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE
>>
>
> that would be a good compromise, I'll write to legal@ anyway because
> at that point I want to understand all that legal stuff

See:

http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses

> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>

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


Mime
View raw message