incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] - Ratify Tuscany PPMC vote to release SDO for Java M2 artifacts
Date Sat, 28 Oct 2006 13:01:54 GMT
On 10/27/06, Bill Dudney <> wrote:
> Hi Kelvin,
> The release includes the license and notice files but I don't see any
> file pointing out the licenses of the individual jar files included
> in the release.
> The notice file is some what ambiguous on what is included under
> which license. It refers to the EPL and CPL (both are fine AFAIKT
> from [1]). But it seems like the notices of which jar is licensed
> under which license should be more explicit [2].

yeh - ATM they are ok but could be improved.

the general idea is to help out downstream repackagers and users by
clearing indicating the licenses for each component in one place. for
example, is better
since it makes it easy to work out which license applies to which jar.

- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message