incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <>
Subject Re: A request for feedback on LICENSE and NOTICE (and others) prior to RC4
Date Sat, 17 Aug 2013 10:41:55 GMT
Hi Ali,

I am going to look at it in detail tomorrow (Sunday)


On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Ali Lown <> wrote:
> Christian/Upayavira,
> (And others are welcome to provide feedback, but I thought it best to
> ask the mentors on this topic)
> Following on from 0.4-rc3, I have been (slowly) attempting to prepare
> an rc4, taking on the feedback from the last vote.
> You can find my work for this at
> This has:
> - Moved all third-party things to be downloaded automatically during
> build - one of the reasons for an IPMC -1. There are now no jars in
> the src releases. [This makes it much smaller!]
> - Fixed assorted licensing (notably src/python/api) and other files to
> use the correct "Licensed to the ASF under contributor license
> agreements" header. - another of the IPMC -1's
> - Removed some more 'Copyright Google 200x' messages that were still
> floating around
> - Added SimpleJSON and Protobuf licenses to LICENSE.
> The other bit of feedback from the incubator vote was regarding
> LICENSE/NOTICE not seeming to be correct.
> I am unclear what should be being put in either/both now. (Especially
> since the third-party items are downloaded rather than being
> distributed by us).
> I also saw it mentioned that sometimes LICENSE/NOTICE are different
> for the source release, than for the binary release - could you
> clarify if that is going to apply to this tree.
> Could you look over the new tree at the above url, and provide some
> information on what should be going in LICENSE/NOTICE now.
> [This is not a request for feedback on the release, rather just some
> pointers on how to tidy up the remaining licensing problems before
> making rc4].
> Thanks.
> Ali


View raw message