directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Legal files goo
Date Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:12:33 GMT
Hi David,

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:40 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Thanks to Dan Kulp the new remote-resources bundle consistent with
> the apparent policy expressed on legal-discuss on the content of
> LICENSE and NOTICE files has been released so I can update the builds
> to use them.
>

Great news thanks for following through and keeping us up to date on this.


>
> I need to know:
>
> - which builds I should update (branches/bigbang? trunk? which
> projects?)


Bigbang is best.  We'll simple replace the trunks with these branches
instead of merging.

>
> - which modules have additional notice requirements beyond the
> standard apache notice.  This would typically be because we've copied
> over code from some other (probably non-apache) project that has a
> NOTICE requirement.
>

I think this information was in those old notice files that were in
subversion.  I don't know anymore off the top of my head.  I think we
probably fixed most of these issues - namely in the kerberos module of
ApacheDS.  Emmanuel might also have a better memory than I here.  Emm what
do you think are we clear here?

For the time being can you consult the original NOTICE files in SVN for this
information?


>
> To summarize what we need:
> each unit likely to be checked out independently needs a LICENSE and
> NOTICE file in svn
> everything else (all the maven  generated jars etc) can have a
> generated LICENSE and NOTICE file.  The NOTICE file needs to be minimal.
>
> In geronimo I also set up some stuff that made it easier for me to
> stage release candidates and maven generated site release
> candidates.  I'll look into whether I think this kind of stuff would
> be appropriate for apacheds when I look at the legal files setup.
>
>
That's great Dave thanks!

Alex

Mime
View raw message