zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Question about license
Date Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:49:06 GMT
Seems to me that we should address these in the next release of 3.4/3.5.
Simple enough to do to some into compliance.

Patrick

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Michael Han <hanm@cloudera.com> wrote:

> 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
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/f6264c94795a489309c23054451d1b
> f9078e7a68#diff-2cccd7bf48b7a9cc113ff564acd802a8.
> 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:
> > >
> > > CAN WE USE DOXYGEN-GENERATED CONFIG FILES?
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

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