incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: LICENSE File?
Date Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:31:23 GMT
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:
> In updating the rules for RAT in maven I have gone through all the issues
> that are in the rat.txt file.
>
> I don't think these Javascript libraries are accounted for in the LICENSE
> file:

Hmm... I think the console wasn't previously in the binary artifact
(was only in src) so I only accounted for them in LICENSE-src.txt.  If
the console is now shipping with the binary convenience artifact, then
I can account for them there.

I'm wondering if we ought to treat minified in the same way as binary?
 In other words, ship the unminified with -src and minify it on build
ourselves?  To kick this thing out the door for now, I agree with
Patrick that maybe we should just punt and ship unminified?

For Gemfile.lock, I'd think since it's generated we could argue it
falls under an exception[1]?

For the rails script, who wrote it? If NIC, it looks like comments are
allowed so why not just add the standard header?

--tim

[1] - http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions

Mime
View raw message