incubator-odf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Florian Hopf <mailingli...@florian-hopf.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] Release Apache ODF Toolkit 0.6-incubating
Date Sat, 02 Mar 2013 06:50:46 GMT
On 01.03.2013 22:59, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dali Liu <wawalovo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Our old release the 0.5 version , the dependency jar files doesn't be
>> included with the binaries package. If we want to include it, just as Rob's
>> consider, there maybe some legal issue.
>>
>
> I'm not saying it is impossible, but we do need to make sure that our
> LICENSE and NOTICE files reflect what we're actually distributing.  So
> if we distribute additional 3rd party code (in the form of a
> dependencies JAR) then we may need to add their info.  But I'm not
> 100% certain.  Maybe someone knows for sure what the policy on this
> is?
>

Ok, this seems to be more complicated than I thought. I just had a look 
at the clerezza project that we are using. They are including some of 
the dependencies in the NOTICE file (among those  WYMIWYG which is also 
a transitive dependency for us) and some additional licenses in their 
LICENSE file.

Which information needs to be included depends on the license: 
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices

I guess we could obtain a lot of the required information from the 
direct dependencies we have as those are all Apache projects. But I am 
OK with distributing the current release without the dependencies and 
have a look at this for the release after that. I'd just like to add 
links to the projects to the README file.

Regards
Florian

> -Rob
>
>
>> 2013/3/2 Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Svante Schubert
>>> <svante.schubert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 01.03.2013 15:50, Florian Hopf wrote:
>>>>> On 01.03.2013 15:31, Svante Schubert wrote:
>>>>>> I do not understand the problem.
>>>>>> In the target output directory of the binaries are different JARs.
>>>>>> Already one jar including with all the dependencies (at least when
the
>>>>>> complete ODF Toolkit project had been build).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but these are not included in the binary distribution. It would
>>>>> probably be enough to add this to the distribution so users can choose
>>>>> which one to use.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I totally off the track with this?
>>>>>
>>>> No, I only haven't related your comment with the distribution. I would
>>>> second your suggestion, that all dependency jars, e.g.
>>>> simple-odf-0.8-incubating-jar-with-dependencies.jar should be
>>> distributed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Note:  If we do that we'll probably will need to revisit our LICENSE
>>> and NOTICE files since we'll be distributing additional components in
>>> our release.
>>>
>>> Or, I'd be fine with just packaging as we did in our last release.   I
>>> don't think we've seen any notes from users saying that they could not
>>> figure out the dependencies.  Or did I miss something?
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Svante
>>>
>


-- 
Florian Hopf
Freelance Software Developer

http://blog.florian-hopf.de

Mime
View raw message