www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Exceptions to the license header requirements
Date Thu, 04 Jul 2013 19:31:05 GMT
On Thursday, 4 July 2013, Sam Ruby wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Connolly
> <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > On 4 July 2013 14:29, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Stephen Connolly
> >> <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > FYI this issue would be good to get resolved quickly as we currently
> >> > have a
> >> > vote for the release of Maven 3.1.0 which is blocked pending
> resolution
> >> > of
> >> > this question.
> >>
> >> Can you confirm that previous releases of Maven shipped with a
> >> substantial portion of these very same tests in essentially their
> >> current state?
> I don't see a direct answer to this question, but I believe I can
> reasonably interpolate one from your answers.
> [snip]
> >
> >The test cases were built up over
> > quite some period of time and the expertise that developed a large chunk
> of
> > these tests has effectively retired from the project (Benjamin Bentmann)
> [snip]
> > Just because it is hard to identify
> > if/how many tests require the absence of a header in order to ensure the
> > defect they are designed to detect is resolved does not mean we should
> never
> > try.
> >
> > My preference is therefore that we add into the NOTICE some (to be
> > determined text) that states that the test data is covered by the license
> > but for historical reasons we are not comfortable adding the headers to
> > these files at this point in time.
> >
> > My plan is to tighten the exemptions in the current RAT checks that we
> use:
> >
> https://github.com/apache/maven/commit/348f7164336e4c2209255daa2acdfcdfcaa8fa5e
> > over the course of a number of releases.
> >
> > I suspect that we will always have some exceptions against our automated
> > checks and hence will always need some statement in the NOTICE file to
> cover
> > that (as I understand it)
> >
> > If the opinion is that we can leave the NOTICE file as is... well woopity
> > doo!
> >
> > Less to do for now, other than over time start removing some of the
> > exceptions in our RAT checks.
> My read is that these tests were indeed publicly released previously,

Correct. Sorry my bad for not making it clear.

> and that there now is an intent to add the headers over time, where
> possible.  No commitment is being made as to the timeframe or to what
> percentage of the tests won't be able to have headers added without
> breaking the tests.
It is an unknown unknown how difficult it will prove... May be a good task
to farm out to people who are interested in getting commit access or want
to just get their feet wet.

> If this is the case, then I'm personally comfortable with that plan
> (others, of course are welcome and encouraged to chime in!).  Perhaps
> you might consider providing quarterly updates?  For simplicity, this
> could be folded in as brief comments in the board reports.

I will see if we can roll it into the template we use in an easy fashion.
This will apply not just to core but also to all our plugin releases.

> there is something substantial to discuss, it could be brought back
> here.

On that basis I read that we are OK to go ahead and continue making
releases - with the proviso that we take an action item to try and cut the
number of files down over time to the minimum.

I still think the FAQ page needs to be updated to ack that there is the
possibility of files not requiring a license header in the case where the
file is test data *and* adding the header would invalidate the test... Feel
free to state that these cases should be exceedingly rare... But the
current wording does not allow for that possibility from my reading anyway

- Stephen

> - Sam Ruby
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org<javascript:;>
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org<javascript:;>

Sent from my phone

View raw message