geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Geronimo 2.0 License and Notice Files
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2007 02:08:13 GMT

On Jul 11, 2007, at 12:24 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:

> If some people could review, that would be great.
>

on the Active-IO question there is some coding work to be done.   
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2944

All of the OpenEJB mods should be AL 2.0 but it sounds like there is  
some work to do in OEJB.  I'll ping the list.

> Next steps and pseudo-random license trivia:
>
> Many jar archives included by Geronimo do not include LICENSE or  
> NOTICE files. In most cases, I've tracked down the appropriate  
> LICENSE information for the resource, and included a url for the  
> LICENSE file. I haven't always done this. So, some work still  
> remains. Most/all of this remaining work involves Apache projects.  
> So, I don't invision a big problem. In some of the cases, the work  
> is not chasing down the license information, but insuring that  
> appropriate LICENSE/NOTICE files are generated in the original jar  
> archive (e.g. OpenEJB).
>

For the rather long list of jars that don't have any embedded files  
is there a recommendation ?  Unlikely we'll get them fixed.

> We currently include all of our LICENSE information in a single  
> root LICENSE.txt file. Some Apache projects include a licenses/  
> directory, instead. This directory includes all of the non-ASL  
> licenses for the project. Although it's probably a bit more work, I  
> personally prefer a single file. However, this is a debatable  
> point. If others have an opinion, they are welcome to voice it.
>

One file would be my preference.

> The root LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt files (by "root" I mean the  
> license/notice file in the bottom level directory of our source and  
> binary distributions) contain the license info for the entire  
> assembly.
>
> We don't currently have different license/notice files that are  
> specific to our Jetty/Tomcat CXF/Axis distributions. Nor do we  
> attempt to generate license/notice files specific to our minimal  
> assemblies. So current course and speed, our root license/notice  
> files will be a superset of all of our various assemblies. This  
> seems fine, to me. If anyone sees a problem with this, speak now...
>

Perhaps a comment that this assembly includes some or all of ....

> Once all of the data in the google spreadsheet is complete, and  
> we've had a chance to review. I'll plan on generating new  
> LICENSE.txt, NOTICE.txt, and DISCLAIMER.txt files for our 2.0  
> release. I'd guess this will be towards the end of the week/over  
> the weekend. If anyone else is interested in grabbing a shovel and  
> pitching in, let me know...
>
> --kevan
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message