groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumac...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: Notices and Licenses
Date Fri, 24 Jul 2015 03:49:53 GMT
Looks very good as far as I can tell.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Pascal

Am 23.07.2015 um 06:53 schrieb Paul King:
>
> I have now removed the notices for "permissive" licenses and adopted 
> short-form
> license referencing where possible.
>
> As part of doing this, I noticed that the grooid jars aren't in the 
> binary zip.
> I made a grooid directory (similar to indy) and put the jars in there. 
> I also
> removed the openbeans jar from the lib directory since it is embedded in
> the grooid jars and I don't believe used anywhere else.
>
> Unless I hear any corrections/objections, I'll merge latest changes 
> back onto
> the 2_4_X branch.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
> On 21/07/2015 10:24 PM, Paul King wrote:
>>
>> I updated the updateLicense task in assemble.gradle (now called 
>> updateLicenses) and added an updateNotices task.
>>
>> If adding/deleting files which have special license requirements you 
>> should place/remove the appropriate notice and license information in 
>> the root project's notices and licenses directories (follow the 
>> conventions of other files), re-run those gradle tasks and then 
>> commit the resulting generated files. See also, the readme.txt files 
>> in those directories. In some cases, you might need to tweak the 
>> assemble.gradle file.
>>
>> Please feel free to review the logic used in those task definitions 
>> and the current generated licenses and notice files. Let me know if 
>> you spot any errors or anything missing.
>>
>> What's still left to do?
>>
>> * Over time we might want to push some of the license/notice 
>> generation down into subprojects and then auto aggregate.
>>
>> * We might be able to remove some notice info I put in for 
>> "deemed-permissive" licenses. Still working on that - might need 
>> clarification from Apache legal.
>>
>> * Using short-form references to licenses is preferred over including 
>> full licenses. We should be able to tweak things to use the 
>> short-form (at least in some places to start with).
>>
>> * I was going to do a bit more checking for any bubble-up 
>> license/notice requirements from our binary dependencies. So far, I 
>> think we might be missing a CDDL license for servlet-api (used by 
>> groovy-servlet) and the public domain license for jsr166y (used by 
>> GPars). I'll keep investigating.
>>
>> Cheers, Paul.
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>


Mime
View raw message