On 04/06/2009, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>  In message <25aac9fc0906040253o2eb1b5f2p42faa517a3a672bd@mail.gmail.com>,
>
> sebb writes:
>  >
>  > On 04/06/2009, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > > In message <200906031731.n53HVE1v011013@d06av01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>,
>  > > Mark Hindess writes:
>  > >
>  > >  > In message <20090603171929.32202724888@athena.apache.org>, Mark Hindess
>  > >  > writes:
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > > Committed in r781482.  There were no code changes so this
>  > >  > > update doesn't impact any existing testing.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Just to clarify, we still need to fix the content of (at least)
>  > >  > the top-level federation build NOTICE file for M10.
>  > >
>  > > Based on the discussion on this list, my reading of the thread at:
>  > >
>  > >   http://markmail.org/thread/shzezyoalnydbflq
>  > >
>  > >  and some reading of other NOTICE files, I think we just need
>  > >  something like the attached patch for M10.
>  > >
>  > >  Can I have committer approval and/or comments please?  My intention
>  > >  would be to apply the patch twice (to the top-level and classlib
>  > >  NOTICE files).
>  >
>  > Most of the patch appears to be the license - PERMISSION - for ICU4J,
>  > and should therefore be in the LICENSE file.
>
>
> It is also in the LICENSE file.  If you think the it should not be
>  reproduced in full in NOTICE then what would be the minimal sufficient
>  content with respect to ICU4J for the NOTICE file?

+Portions of Apache Harmony's Class Library TEXT module contain JavaDoc
+derived from the ICU project.
+Copyright (c) 1995-2008 International Business Machines Corporation and others

Remove the lines containing ===============.

>  Regards,
>
> -Mark
>
>
>