drill-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sudheesh Katkam (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (DRILL-1274) Update License file to correctly identify source inclusions versus binary inclusions
Date Tue, 19 Aug 2014 02:34:19 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-1274?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Sudheesh Katkam updated DRILL-1274:
-----------------------------------

    Attachment: DRILL-1274-binary-license.patch

Note that the licenses should contain exactly the dependencies included in the distribution.

> Update License file to correctly identify source inclusions versus binary inclusions
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DRILL-1274
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-1274
>             Project: Apache Drill
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Tools, Build & Test
>            Reporter: Jacques Nadeau
>            Assignee: Aditya Kishore
>             Fix For: 0.5.0
>
>         Attachments: DRILL-1274-binary-license.patch
>
>
> Issues found with last release:
> - LICENSE file is not correct - looks like quite a few things need to be removed as they
are not actually bundled in the source artefact. The LICENSE file in the source artefact should
only reference software that is actually bundled in the source release.
> - LICENSE file doesn't need to contain references to Apache licensed software only MIT
and BSD software. Each bundled Apache software may modify the NOTICE file.
> - LICENSE issue "The compiled Apache Drill distribution includes the following sources/binaries."
is incorrect as a source distribution shouldn't normally contain binaries.
> - LICENSE refers to CDDL licensed, CPL licensed, EPL licensed and MPL licensed software
- all which are category B licences. Are these actually included in the source release and
if so how? And if they are included why are they not in the NOTICE file (as per [2]) If not
included why are these mentioned in the the LICENCES file at all?
> I think the issue is we're using the same license file for both source and binary tarballs.
 We need to separate these out.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message