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

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!