www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: dependency on CDDL binary
Date Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:03:20 GMT


On 2/23/16, 11:39 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" <marvin@rectangular.com> wrote:

>On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
>wrote:
>
>We're going to need to go license-by-license and build two matrixes: one
>for
>source packages and one for binary packages.  Category A licenses may
>require
>different treatment in source packages and binary packages.

Marvin, 

You may need a third matrix for documentation packages.  One of our PMC
members found that our documentation package LICENSE is not correct for
its contents.  When you get around to updating the how-to, it might help
to mention that the L & N requirements apply for doc packages as well as
source and binary so future release managers know what to expect.

Thanks,
-Alex

Mime
View raw message