geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Re: More to be added to licenses file for 1.1.1 ?
Date Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:07:41 GMT

On Jul 18, 2006, at 8:53 AM, John Sisson wrote:

> Whilst testing the geronimo eclipse plugin, eclipse prompted me to  
> acknowledge the Sun license at 
> berkeley_license.html when caching the j2ee schema files (e.g.  
> ).
> This made me wonder whether this license has been included for  
> Geronimo (since we redistribute schema files) and it appears the  
> LICENSE.txt file in 1.1 doesn't contain it.
> I'll add a JIRA for 1.1.1 if there aren't any objections.
> Can anyone think of any other licenses or notices we may have  
> overlooked?

Yes. Would appreciate your thoughts on the following:

1) Fix LICENSE and NOTICE files for branches/1.1/modules/util  
(currently they are only Bouncy Castle -- I believe that we have ASL  
code in there, also).
2) Do we need to add Bouncy Castle to our "global" LICENSE and NOTICE  
files (i.e. branches/1.1/modules/scripts/src/resources/) ? I think yes.
3) Insure NOTICE files are included in our jar files (currently only  
LICENSE files are there)
4) Do we need to add LICENSE/NOTICE files in our generated CARs?
5) Can the "global" LICENSE and NOTICE files be used in all our  
generated artifacts (distributions, jars, cars)? Or do we need global  
files and specific license/notice files for generated module jars and  
car files?


View raw message