incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: IP clearance issues ( was Re: AOO 3.4 QA Weekly Status Report As of 2012.03.19(2012.03.13 - 2012.03.19))
Date Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:21:17 GMT
Hi Dennis;

On 03/19/12 11:55, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Apache releases handle the equivalent of the THIRDPARTYLICENSES by combined use of the
NOTICE and LICENSE files.

We are aware of that. The THIRDPARTYLICENSES thing is a left over from
the LGPL days and is not relevant for our purposes. I only use it as
reference but if someone else doing this stuff in another, more
systematic way, please raise your hand and I won't interfere.


>    Also, as has been determined elsewhere, the NOTICE and LICENSE files on a binary distribution
may be different than on the source code because of additional third-party material that may
be embedded in a binary release.

It was also determined that the LICENSE file would only carry the AL2.
At this time whatever was "determined" is not really relevant. I would
prefer to have some reference for this: the branding guide doesn't
mention anything about the LICENSE file, other than the fact that it
exists.

> When the IP clearance is completed, the THIRDPARTYLICENSES notice should disappear and
the NOTICE and LICENSE files should carry the necessary information instead.
>
>
Replying to your other email, yes RAT is interesting but we are currently
excluding a lot of files from that analysis.

Pedro.

Mime
View raw message