On 2019-10-21 09:20, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Magnus Ihse Bursie:
I want to fix some oversight in building the documentation (where
content derived from open builds is incorrectly labeled as closed),
and it would be nice to control the new behavior with such a flag.
Hm? I'm not sure what this means, but that sounds like a proper bug that
should be fixed without reference to closed sources. If you have just
OpenJDK checked out, with no closed sources present, the build should
just create an open build without issues. Are you talking about the
documentation in doc/*.md?
It's about this setting in make/Docs.gmk:
# $1 - Relative prefix to COPYRIGHT_URL
COPYRIGHT_BOTTOM = \
<a href="$(strip $1)$(COPYRIGHT_URL)">Copyright</a> \
© 1993, $(COPYRIGHT_YEAR), $(FULL_COMPANY_NAME), \
$(COMPANY_ADDRESS).<br>All rights reserved. \
Use is subject to <a href="$(LICENSE_URL)">license terms</a> and the \
<a href="$(REDISTRIBUTION_URL)">documentation redistribution policy</a>. \
$(DRAFT_MARKER_STR) <!-- Version $(VERSION_STRING) -->
JAVADOC_BOTTOM := \
<a href="$(BUG_SUBMIT_URL)">Report a bug or suggest an enhancement</a><br>
\
For further API reference and developer documentation see the \
<a href="$(JAVADOC_BASE_URL)" target="_blank">Java SE \
Documentation</a>, which contains more detailed, \
developer-targeted descriptions with conceptual overviews, definitions \
of terms, workarounds, and working code examples.<br> \
Java is a trademark or registered trademark of $(FULL_COMPANY_NAME) in \
the US and other countries.<br> \
$(call COPYRIGHT_BOTTOM, {@docroot}/../)
I'm hoping that we can all agree that the documentation redistribution
policy does not apply to open builds.
Actually, I'm not at all sure that we can agree on that. Ifaik the legal
conditions around documentation is murky (to me, at least) at best.
Before going any further on an actual patch I suggest you get
clarification on the legal implications.
/Magnus
So the built documentation for
open builds should not refer to it.
