www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marshall Schor <...@schor.com>
Subject Re: License / Notice files in binary packaging that aggregates several smaller Apache-licensed components
Date Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:54:32 GMT
Another idea for your automated solution.

Some of our binary packages include Jars from other Apache projects.

These Jars sometimes have within them, often within the META-INF dir, various
LICENSE / NOTICE files.  One, for example, is this Jar: 
    <dependency>
      <groupId>org.apache.lucene</groupId>
      <artifactId>lucene-snowball</artifactId>
      <version>2.9.3</version>
    </dependency>

which you can see in
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/lucene/lucene-snowball/2.9.3/lucene-snowball-2.9.3.jar

has a special LICENSE and NOTICE file, plus an additional SNOWBALL-LICENSE.txt

I presume that to properly include this Jar in a binary distribution, I have to
merge all of these LICENSE files (and merge the NOTICE one too).

-Marshall

On 8/3/2011 8:22 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> On 07/26/11 19:38, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> The Apache UIMA project produces several "add-ons", each separately built, each
>> having appropriate LICENSE and NOTICE files.
>>
>> We also have a binary assembly that takes several of these add-ons, and puts
>> them together into one binary package, for convenience.
>>
>> In the past, we have used a process where we prepare the LICENSE and NOTICE file
>> for this aggregation by manually concatenating the LICENSE files (eliminating
>> duplicates) to create the assembly LICENSE, and similarly for the NOTICE file.
>>
>> I think I've seen in other places (non-Apache) that some aggregations do things
>> like write "Please refer to the individual components for their LICENSE and
>> NOTICES".   This would certainly make future maintenance of this assembly,
>> easier.  The assembly top level project itself has nothing in it other than the
>> assembly instructions and pom boilerplate to make it go; its source is Apache
>> licensed.
>>
>> Is that something we can do for our binary assembly of these things?
> We're facing a similar problem over at James. I found that many
> dependencies don't include enough information to this plan viable.
>
> I'm working on an automation solution ATM. My hope is this product will
> be in scope for a future Apache Rat TLP.
>
> How does this sound to you?
>
> Robert
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message