directory-kerby mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] - Release Apache Kerby 1.0.0
Date Sun, 07 May 2017 15:12:19 GMT


Le 07/05/2017 à 13:08, Stefan Seelmann a écrit :
> On 05/06/2017 09:53 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
>> but I can't cas a +1 : the N&L are lacking some required external
>> licenses (MIT for mockito, qos.ch for slf4j, BSD for harmcrest, ASM is
>> BSD, and bytebuddy depends on it, Junit is ECL, Netty has a NOTICE file
>> just must be included - see
>> https://github.com/netty/netty/blob/4.1/NOTICE.txt- , and has *many*
>> dependencies on other products, that must be listed if used -see
>> https://github.com/netty/netty/tree/4.1/license-)
> I don't think we have to list all those licenses. As far as I see for
> Kerby we only distribute the source (which is ASLv2 only) and the JARs.
> We don't distribute any artifact that bundles any third-party
> dependency. [1] clearly states: "Dependencies which are not included in
> the distribution MUST NOT be added to LICENSE and NOTICE. As far as
> LICENSE and NOTICE are concerned, only bundled bits matter."
>
> But maybe I'm wrong and Maven dependencies count as "bundled"?
It depends.

First of all, we *must* have different N&L files if we distribute
sources on one side and a bnary package on another side. This is
typically what we do with apacheDS : we have the source targ.gz and a
binary (the installers). As they embed different components, they have
differnet N&L files. For instance, the
installers-maven-plugin/src/main/resources/org/apache/directory/server/installers/LICENSE
file contains the antlr license while the root LICENSE file does not :
it makes totally sense because we don't have any generated antlr file in
the source, while we have many in the installers.

All in all, this is the logic to follow :

* if a library is present in the package, and if its LICENSE is not AL
2.0, then add the LICENSE file in the package
* if a library is present in the package, and if there is a NOTICE file
for this lib then it must be added in the package
* of course, we don't support any non-AL 2.0 compatible bundle (GPL/LGPL
aren't accepted license)

There are specific cases : everything that is required to build the
sources, and that will not generate files (à la antlr) don't need to get
their N&L added. Same thing for the tests.

One more thing : we *may* distribute source only, but at some point,
people will build it and embed the result in their product. It's fine if
our source package does not include any N&L from bundles that are
referenced by maven dependencies, as we don't bundle those dependencies
in the resulting source tar gz. But at some point, people *will* consume
a library, generated *from* the sources, and this library may content
external dependencies : at this point, this library *MUST* contain all
the required N&L.

At this point, I don't know what we package : there is a kerby-dist
sub-project, which supposely generates the packages, but it's hard to
tell what is inside, without looking to the maven pom files and assembly
files. I'd like that to be explicit somewhere for people to check easily
the validity of the packages...


-- 
Emmanuel Lecharny

Symas.com
directory.apache.org


Mime
View raw message