Mailing-List: contact user-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Users List" <user@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of phidias51@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.128.184 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=B32/em9PPWIHSs9q4slKnw/IIv1PqJhOl04ii5BRKUV96HaO89I0anBJZWJO5fS76Nnol2aUkbM2yC5JzlusYNtwTsQEAWxE6G0UDUNwzTKp7gUdG2XmUHnHBD5p5AhwqfrtxrbKyp9qh8iM6N8l4ApkN1pnbwRI6s47UEZVRt0=
Message-ID: <6e1d61f50708200734u19b63912nd2002bbd1c49c145@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 07:34:09 -0700
From: "Mark Fortner" <phidias51@gmail.com>
To: "Jakarta Commons Users List" <user@commons.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [all] Standardized Manifest For Commons JARs
In-Reply-To: <25aac9fc0708200726r23d1d245r1dc7a63fb3b80e06@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_107867_24894739.1187620449182"
References: <6e1d61f50708192213r27d4cf77h3186a5d5133d13b0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <25aac9fc0708200726r23d1d245r1dc7a63fb3b80e06@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_107867_24894739.1187620449182
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Unfortunately the license files aren't named consistently, and aren't always
included in the library.  Some projects use LICENSE, others License, others
still use License.txt.  Having a single license URL attribute which can
either be resolved to a local license, or a remote license seemed to make
the most sense.  Either that, or standardize all of the manifest entries.
:-)  But I'm trying to shoot for low-hanging fruit at the moment.

Mark

On 8/20/07, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 20/08/07, Mark Fortner <phidias51@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've been working on a project to help catalog the JARs that we use and
> the
> > concomitant licenses that they employ so that we can more easily comply
> with
> > sections 4a and 4c of the APL without having to do a lot work to compile
> the
> > license information.  I thought at first this would be fairly simple to
> do,
> > given that all of the Commons projects (that we use) have manifests.
> > However, I soon discovered that the manifests have a variety of
> different
> > attributes and aren't really standardized.
> >
> > I was wondering if it would be possible in the next release(s) if the
> leads
> > for the projects could modify the manifests (or the ant/maven builds
> that
> > generated them) to include the following information:
> >
> > License Type: APL
> > License Version: 2.0
> > License URL: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
> >
> > or
> >
> > License URL: /license.txt
> > if you've included the license file in the jar file.
>
> The manifest names would surely need to be called:
>
> X-License ...
>
> as the License attributes don't appear to be defined in the Java
> documentation.
>
> However, this information should already be provided in the NOTICE and
> LICENSE files in the jar.
>
> > This would help us insure that we're providing the appropriate license
> > information when distributing Apache libraries with our code.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mark Fortner
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

------=_Part_107867_24894739.1187620449182--