harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Hindess <mark.hind...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [general] More license fixes for M11
Date Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:03:03 GMT

I've already committed this change in r808406 with Oliver's approval.

In message <4A967DC9.1060004@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
>
> On 27/Aug/2009 11:29, Mark Hindess wrote:
> > I also updated APR during this milestone.  (However, the
> > LICENSE/NOTICE sections were missing already AFAICT.)  I'd like to
> > commit the appended patch to fix this.
>
> I believe the reason is that we are not redistributing these
> dependencies in the source builds.

The zlib notice has been in the NOTICE/THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.txt file
since M1 and that is a similar downloaded dependency?

> Which raises the thorny question, are you trying to gather the
> licenses and notices for the source artifact we are going to vote
> on and release, or for the binary which contains copies of the
> dependencies we drag in?

Yes! ;-)


Both.  Currently LICENSE/NOTICE files at each top-level (classlib,
jdktools, vm and federated build[0]) are used when we use the source
artifacts to create corresponding binary artifacts.

The quick fix would be:

1) accept that the source artifact has "too much" information in its
LICENSE/NOTICE files,

2) not create any binaries and remove the associated entries, or

3) derive separate LICENSE/NOTICE files for use in binaries (patch welcome ;-)

I vote for 1) for this release since we've accepted this since M1 (zlib is a
binary not source dependency).

Regards,
 Mark.

[0] If "svn co" is a release and we support working at the classlib/module/* 
    level then perhaps we need to create the 30+ LICENSE/NOTICE files in
    the modules too.



Mime
View raw message