zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Han <h...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Question about license
Date Sat, 15 Apr 2017 00:32:52 GMT
Looks like the Doxyfiles were deliberately excluded from the release audit
target, that is why we did not catch it. It's done back in 2010 in commit
And the exclude list stays pretty much the same over the years.

Do we need to do something about this for this release? I think probably we
don't so we can be consistent with previous releases <grin>.

Do we need to do something in long term about these files? Maybe, and if we
do I think these files should be taken out of the exclude list so they can
be checked at release audit time.

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:

> Hm. Looks like this came in well after we started using doxygen. Background
> is here:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-224
> I believe what they mean is that all of the comments - "comment lines" iiuc
> - in the file need to be removed and just keep the variable definition
> lines.
> Seems easy enough to do. If you do it please be sure to do it for all of
> them:
> ./src/c/c-doc.Doxyfile
> ./src/contrib/zkfuse/src/doxygen.cfg
> ./src/recipes/lock/src/c/c-doc.Doxyfile
> ./src/recipes/queue/src/c/c-doc.Doxyfile
> Patrick
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org> wrote:
> > I think this is a question more for Pat Hunt. When going over the RAT
> > report for the 3.5.3 RC, I noticed a bunch of doxygen-related files that
> > have been there for quite some as they don't have the Apache License
> > header. What actually called my attention is this observation in the
> legal
> > FAQ:
> >
> > As long as the generated comments are removed from the Doxygen-generated
> > files, these files may be used.
> >
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> >
> > I'm not entirely sure what comments this is referring to. Does Pat or
> > anyone else remember if we have done a license sanity check on those
> files?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Flavio


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message