Hi all, I'm going through and applying the necessary licenses for release (JIRA at [1]) but I have some concerns.
The UI code layout is seeded off angular-seed [2]. Officially there isn't a license for this project (at least I couldn't find one). Certain files do list license info and I gather from the ASF docs [3] that I should leave them alone. My concern is for files that were boilerplate from angular-seed. Some of these have been heavily modified. For instance, the unit test file for controllers came from [4] but now looks like [5]. This has been almost entirely changed. However, the unit test file for services is (nearly) identical. See [6] and [7] for a comparison. Again, I gather from [3] that we should be leaving the unchanged files alone. For the heavily changed files should we license those and what constitutes 'heavily modified' vs 'lightly modified"? Would it be easier to simply state in the NOTICE that this was built on top of the angular-seed boilerplate code and leave the licence off the majority of those files? Perhaps I should go through all the boilerplate files and wipe them clean so we can license them? Or should I assume that boilerplate files are ok to tag with our license since that's probably what the original authors would have intended even if we haven't made significant (or any) changes. Thoughts? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLIMATE-107 [2] https://github.com/angular/angular-seed [3] https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html // Controllers comparison [4] https://github.com/angular/angular-seed/blob/master/test/unit/controllersSpec.js [5] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/climate/trunk/rcmet/src/main/ui/test/unit/controllersSpec.js // Services comparison [6] https://github.com/angular/angular-seed/blob/master/test/unit/servicesSpec.js [7] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/climate/trunk/rcmet/src/main/ui/test/unit/servicesSpec.js Thanks -- Joyce
