felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>
Subject Re: NOTICE/DEPENDENCIES files for Felix subproject releases
Date Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:53:43 GMT
On 6/9/10 16:49, David Jencks wrote:
> The DEPENDENCIES file is completely optional as far as apache policy is concerned.  I
wrote the maven code that generates these with the intention of giving users hints about the
other software that would likely be needed to actually use the artifact containing the DEPENDENCIES
file.  As such, it only includes (appropriately scoped) dependencies, not all the maven stuff
that may have been used to generate the artifact.
>
> Since felix is an osgi based project that uses osgi to hook up bundles, and avoids require-bundle
like the plague, and there's no good reason to suppose that the maven dependencies will be
the actual providers of the required imports,  a strong case could be made that felix should
simply not include DEPENDENCIES files.
>    

There is no real requirement to include DEPENDENCIES other than trying 
to acknowledge the other software we use. Even though we avoid 
require-bundle, it is still typically possible to know which software we 
use, so we just try to be nice and acknowledge it. I was originally 
going to call the file ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, but decided to use DEPENDENCIES 
so that it would be the same as the generated file if people wanted to 
generate it. Ultimately, we could decide to stop doing this, but for now 
we do.

-> richard

> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Jun 9, 2010, at 12:30 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>
>    
>> On 6/9/10 14:52, Justin Edelson wrote:
>>      
>>> Richard-
>>> Perhaps this is supposed to be obvious, but I think it would be helpful to
>>> define the term "uses" with respect to the DEPENDENCIES file. IIUC, it
>>> includes dependencies (in any scope) as well as software executed as part of
>>> the build (i.e. Maven Plugins), but the inclusion of the latter may not be
>>> intuitive.
>>>
>>>        
>> True. We need to be clearer...
>>
>> ->  richard
>>
>>      
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> With the latest release of the framework and Gogo modules, we've tried to
>>>> update the release process for how we handle the NOTICE file. Our past usage
>>>> is apparently not aligned with the intended usage, where the NOTICE file
>>>> should only contained notices for included third-party software whose
>>>> license requires notice. Our new approach (for now) is this:
>>>>
>>>>   1. Include a NOTICE file which contains only required notices.
>>>>   2. Include a DEPENDENCIES file which contains our acknowledgments
>>>>      about the software the subproject uses.
>>>>
>>>> For the most part, this isn't a major hassle and largely boils down to
>>>> this:
>>>>
>>>>   1. Rename the current NOTICE file to DEPENDENCIES.
>>>>   2. Create a new NOTICE file that contains notices only for the "used"
>>>>      software requiring notices in the DEPENDENCIES file.
>>>>
>>>> Although the new DEPENDENCIES file is very similar to the old NOTICE file,
>>>> the template is slightly different as indicated here:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FELIX/DEPENDENCIES+file+template+%28PROPOSED%29
>>>>
>>>> Of course, in the long term we can try to move to automating the generation
>>>> of the NOTICE and/or DEPENDENCIES files, which would make our lives simpler.
>>>> If any subprojects currently are able to automate this information, as long
>>>> as the generated files contain information consistent with what is proposed
>>>> here, then the exact formatting is not that important. But for hand
>>>> generated files, follow this template.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to see examples, look in the framework or gogo subprojects.
>>>>
>>>> ->   richard
>>>>
>>>> p.s. This is obviously all open for discussion to the specifics, but until
>>>> then we should use this approach for releases in an effort to better align
>>>> with Apache process (with perhaps the exception of Karaf since if/when it
>>>> goes TLP then its PMC will decide how to do releases).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>
>>>        
>    

Mime
View raw message