falcon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Douglas (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (FALCON-453) possible LICENSE/NOTICE issues
Date Sun, 27 Jul 2014 22:51:38 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14075780#comment-14075780
] 

Chris Douglas commented on FALCON-453:
--------------------------------------

I meant MIT and 3-clause BSD, but then realized it'd be easier to just include the license
from each project explicitly (and it addresses your point about them changing over time).
Thanks for reviewing the iterations on this.

> possible LICENSE/NOTICE issues
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FALCON-453
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-453
>             Project: Falcon
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>    Affects Versions: 0.5
>            Reporter: Venkatesh Seetharam
>            Assignee: Venkatesh Seetharam
>             Fix For: 0.5
>
>         Attachments: FALCON-453-deps-2.patch, FALCON-453-deps.patch, FALCON-453-v2.patch,
FALCON-453.patch
>
>
> What external code has been bundled with the source? To me it look like the NOTICE file
may be referring to a binary release not the source release? For example it mentions antlr
in the NOTICE file but I can't find any antlr code in the source release. As antlr is BSD
does it even need to be in NOTICE file?  It's may be that all source files have had their
headers changed to ALv2?
> I also not the use of some fonts (from http://glyphicons.com?) and while they are included
in the NOTICE but I'm not sure how they have been licensed. If it the free version and if
so have the terms of the license met? [1]
> NOTICE file is incorrect; it must not have the following header:
> =========================================================================
> ==  NOTICE file corresponding to the section 4 d of                    ==
> ==  the Apache License, Version 2.0,                                   ==
> ==  in this case for the Apache Falcon distribution.                   ==
> =========================================================================
> Also the NOTICE file must ONLY contain required notices for files that
> are actually in the enclosing distribution.
> As such, the entries headed "This product includes/uses" are wrong;
> only *included* bits are relevant when determining what must go in the
> NOTICE file.
> The LICENSE file should specify the versions of the included software,
> because licenses may change between versions.
> Again, only included code should be referenced.



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

Mime
View raw message