www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carlos Sanchez" <car...@apache.org>
Subject Re: POM licensing
Date Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:21:59 GMT
i'm trying to follow this thread and seems that we are talking about
two different things:

1) the license of the project the pom describes
2) the license of the pom itself

For 1) all apache projects must extend the parent apache pom
  <parent>
    <groupId>org.apache</groupId>
    <artifactId>apache</artifactId>
    <version>4</version>
  </parent>

For 2) all projects need to add the license header to the pom as they
do with any other file in apache svn


On 10/1/07, Steve Loughran <steve.loughran@gmail.com> wrote:
>  On 9/30/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <rdonkin@apache.org> wrote:
>
>  >
>  > > 3.  we could make it explicit for all future uploads.
>  >
>  > that'd do a lot to clarify the status and allow people outside apache to
>  > safe copy and use this meta-data
>
> OK. all POMs that I have provided are apache licensed. That includes
> smartfrog poms that are in
> http://smartfrog.sourceforge.net/repository/.
>
> We actually autogenerate all our POMs under Ant from templates that
> have space for a dynamically inserted comment...all we include is
> dependency info. I will change the comment to make it clear that even
> though the libs are all LPGL, these poms are apache licensed.
>
> How does this go?
>
>     <property name="pom.comments"
>       value="
>       Created ${build.date} by ${user.name}.
>       This metadata file is published under an Apache license.
>       " />
>
> Would that be enough info?
>
> Obviously we should be publishing all this stuff as machine readable
> RDF triplets or something, if you really want to mine the meta-data.
> Then more facts/beliefs would get added during the build /publish
> process, so every pom has a complete audit trail (our comments like to
> do blame assignment, but now that we do releases on shared vmware
> images, that isnt so reliable
>
>  >
>  > > What MD-mining have you been planning?
>  >
>  > the discordia lab plans to extract licensing related information to
>  > build a artifact->license database (probably using RDF). this can then
>  > be used to cross reference to license family meta-data.
>
> My colleague paolo castagna -who was at apachecon EU and is probably
> on the mail list- has done the RDF extraction. I've always been
> meaning to do some walking of the dependency graph.
>
> Paolo? Are you there?
>
> -steve
>


-- 
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
                             -- The Princess Bride

Mime
View raw message