incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <>
Subject Re: Can we distribute the sun mail and activation jar files in our distribution?
Date Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:00:48 GMT
On Tuesday 20 February 2007 11:47, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2007, at 7:35 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> > I don't like the "poms" for most of the specs artifacts (the <name>
> > fields
> > should say "Apache Geronimo-Specs XXXXX" or similar), but that's
> > minor.
> > Would be nice if they had SAAJ 1.3 and JWS annotations, but it's a
> > start.  :-)
> Can you provide a concrete example?  Thanks!

The reasoning comes from the new maven-remote-resources-plugin that we 
(CXF, UIMA, all the Maven stuff, hopefully more soon) (maybe even yoko) will
be using to generate the NOTICE files automatically from the dependencies 
in the poms.  The OLD (1.0.1 geronimo stuff), the poms had very little 
information in them.  Thus, the NOTICE resulted in lines that just look 

This product includes/uses software, JMS

With the new (1.1) poms and the genesis heiarchy, the result is much better:

This product includes/uses software, JMS 1.1 (,
developed by Apache Software Foundation  (
License: The Apache Software License, Version 2.0  (

That's certainly better than the Sun jars that end up with:

This product includes/uses software, Unnamed - javax.annotation:jsr250-api:jar:1.0

However, my concern is more about the Apache branding rules.   The branding
always has to be "Apache XXXXX".   In this case, it looks like the project
name is just "JMS 1.1", which is technically wrong.   We do add the rest of
the Apache stuff in the two lines after it, but it's still a concern.   I'm
not a lawyer, but I usually try to do too much to apease them rather
than figure out if I've done enough.

J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194

View raw message