river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: JSTK import (Was: Short term plan forward... (proposal))
Date Mon, 28 May 2007 14:44:21 GMT
Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
> On 5/25/07, Jim Hurley <Jim.Hurley@sun.com> wrote:
>> We are going to get the starter kit contribution bundle attached today.
> Saw it on RIVER-28. Thanks for all the background work on this, I'm
> really excited to see the code coming in!
>> Assuming folks have a chance to check it out over the next few days,
>> I'd like to start an acceptance vote on it early next week.
> I'm flying back to Finland from New York this weekend so I don't have
> much time to look at it in more detail, but based on a quick overview
> the import looks great.
> Some comments:
> * The "Copyright 2005 Sun Microsystems, Inc." text should not be
> included in the license headers. The copyright is of course still
> Sun's, but the policy is to put all such copyright notices in the
> NOTICE file. The standard license header is copyright-agnostic on
> purpose to allow equal contributions from multiple different copyright
> holders. See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers for
> more details. You can just note on the issue that it is OK to move the
> copyright notices to the NOTICE file once the code is in svn if it's
> difficult to produce a modified version of the source zip.
> * The LICENSE and NOTICE files should be included at the root of the
> source tree. A README would also be nice. We can add those once the
> code is in svn.
> As a personal preference it would be nice if the license header was
> folded at 80 characters (see below), but it's probably not worth the
> effort to change that.

I come to the same observations as Jukka. Given the JTSK code base of
honoring 80 chars/line max I would suggest to take exactly the same
license header as the ServiceUI code has.

I hope running the license header update script can be run again without
too much effort.

Although I don't consider this to be essential for accepting the import,
but I tried to build from the import and I was not successful with
generating the javadoc as it appears to complain about an Illegal
package name, likely this is due to the modification of the copyright
notice, although I couldn't see a mistake that quickly. I did shorten
the api-copyright attribute to only "Licensed" and then it works.

View raw message