Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB68310D1F for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:40:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 71970 invoked by uid 500); 20 Sep 2013 16:39:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 71342 invoked by uid 500); 20 Sep 2013 16:39:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 71299 invoked by uid 99); 20 Sep 2013 16:39:53 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:39:53 +0000 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:39:53 +0000 (UTC) From: "Marvin Humphrey (JIRA)" To: legal-discuss@apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-178) Location of LICENSE/NOTICE files in binary release artifacts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-178?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13773163#comment-13773163 ] Marvin Humphrey commented on LEGAL-178: --------------------------------------- It's been pointed out on general@incubator list that that convenience binaries are not and cannot be official ASF releases. The VOTE of an Apache PMC only applies to the canonical source release, and while incidental quality control may be performed by some members of the PMC on the convenience binary, only the source archive qualifies an official ASF distribution, released as an act of the corporation. As this discussion has illustrated, the policies in src-headers.html are not cleanly applicable to binary distributions. We may make efforts to apply them as best we can and social norms have arisen around those efforts, but quality control can only be porous when the rules don't fit and our documented release approval process provides zero guarantees that any PMC member has even looked at any given binary artifact. Our distribution areas contain official source releases which are subjected to our official policies, but they also contain "other stuff". By tradition, this "other stuff" consists mainly of "convenience binaries", but determinations as to just what "other stuff" may live in our distribution areas are made informally -- primarily by the PMC in question, but also by Infrastructure, etc. In my view, it would be best to leave the status quo alone and continue with informal enforcement of norms, because the prospect of making official ASF binary releases is much, much bigger than just where the licensing info must go in specific binary formats. That would mean remanding the case of what to do with Chukwa's binary -- which while it may violate social norms regarding layout of jar-flavored convenience binaries, does not violate anybody's license nor ASF policies regarding distributions (since it is not an official distribution) -- to the Incubator PMC. > Location of LICENSE/NOTICE files in binary release artifacts > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: LEGAL-178 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-178 > Project: Legal Discuss > Issue Type: Question > Reporter: ant elder > > Over at the Incubator a question has come up over where the LICENSE and NOTICE files should be located in binary release artifacts. I can't find any precise or accurate documentation on this so could that be defined here? > The web page http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice says: > "Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the top directory, along with the standard LICENSE file." > However things like Java .jar artifacts don't do that and instead have them located in the /META-INF directory. Related to that, what about things like Windows .msi or .exe insaller packages which don't have a "top directory"? > I vaguely remember this question coming up before but i can't find anything in the archives now, FWIR the answer then was it was ok for the LICENSE/NOTICE to be located where ever was most appropriate and expected for the environment and binary artifact type. > Any comments? -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org