incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release ServiceMix 3.1.1 (2nd try)
Date Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:34:46 GMT
On 6/16/07, Bruce Snyder <bruce.snyder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have have some questions that need answering before we can proceed
> with the release. Please them inline below:
>
> On 5/29/07, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > > On 5/28/07, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Just a friendly reminder.  We're missing anoter IPMC vote ...
> > >
> > > issues
> > > -------
> > >
> > > i think that apache-servicemix-3.1.1-incubating.tar.gz has some
> > > libraries in lib that are missing their LICENSE/NOTICE entries (eg
> > > howl, jencks)
> > There are licensed under ASL 2.0 and don't have any NOTICE file afaik.
> > Should all the jars be listed in the LICENSE / NOTICE file ? My
> assumption
> > was that only those who had some attributions somehow or with a
> > different license
> > need to be, but correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Can someone clarify this?


it's best that license information is provided clearly for all external
parts of a release. otherwise, the collective license can be confused with
the constituent licenses.

i don't think that it's positively harmful to ship a release which is
missing information about jars that are apache licensed but i would ask to
find out their licensing if i didn't know them

(IMHO we need to move towards using meta-data to record this information so
that these questions don't have to continually asked)

How are Apache Licensed projects that are
> included in an ASF project supposed to be handled if they don't
> provide their own NOTICE file?


it they don't provide their own NOTICE file then that's fine

but again, missing NOTICE files raise questions which then require answers

> > apache-servicemix-3.1.1-incubating-src.zip contains a directory that
> > > seems like somethings gone wrong (src/C:tmp)
> > I will fix that.
> > >
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/tags/servicemix-3.1.1/web/servicemix-web-console/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/sitemesh-decorator.tld
> > >
> > > is licensed under "The OpenSymphony Software License, Version 1.1" - i
> > > can't see this in LICENSE or NOTICE. same goes to
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/tags/servicemix-3.1.1/web/servicemix-web-console/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/sitemesh-page.tld
> > >
> > >
> > > i think that
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/tags/servicemix-3.1.1/web/servicemix-web-console/src/main/webapp/js/common.js
> > >
> > > requires attribution but i can't see anything in NOTICE
> > >
> > > i think that
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/tags/servicemix-3.1.1/web/servicemix-web-console/src/main/webapp/js/css.js
> > >
> > > is missing from the LICENSE
> > >
> > > also
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/tags/servicemix-3.1.1/web/servicemix-web-console/src/main/webapp/js/plotkit/*.js
> > >
> > >
> > > (after re-reading the latest version of
> > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html, i'm not sure how this
> > > applies javascript and other distributed source. i'll follow this up
> > > with legal.)
> > I will add these informations to the LICENSE / NOTICE files.
>
> Is it sufficient to place these licenses in the NOTICE file? Can
> someone clarify this please?


see http://www.apache.org/legal/

personally, speaking i wouldn't -1 a release that include LICENSE
information in the NOTICE but AIUI it's more appropriate in LICENSE

> > otherwise generally ok but i have a few questions
> > >
> > > source in
> > >
> http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/servicemix-3.1.1-incubating/org/apache/servicemix/samples/wsdl-first/wsdl-first-jsr181-su/3.1.1-incubating/
> > >
> > > lacks headers. is this going to be released? if so, are these
> > > generated?
> > >
> > > are the jars under
> > > http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/servicemix-3.1.1-incubating/ going to
> > > be released?
> > >
> > > servicemix-wsn2005-3.1.1-incubating-sources.jar contains lots of java
> > > sources without headers (mostly under
> > > org.apache.servicemix.wsn.jaxws). is this going to be released? if so,
> > > are these generated?
> > Yeah, lots of these files are generated.  Files generated are not in svn
> > so we usually check the headers on the svn tree rather than the source
> > jars generated by maven.  These jars are not meant to be built for only
> > contain all the java sources for debugging purposes.   If you want to
> > build these jars, you need to use the source distribution or use the svn
> > tag.
>
> So do we need to license generated files?


nope (AIUI generated files are not independently copyrightable)

just needed to check that these were indeed generated and so didn't need a
license header

- robert

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message