Henri, How do you know that the reports are GPL? I knew Cobertura is written under GPL, but how does that extend to the report generation?
Paul On Jan 19, 2008 1:51 PM, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just wanting to share concern about a couple of things: > > 1) Using Cobertura. It's reports are GPL. > 2) Including sites in downloads. > > If we have a component with Cobertura turned on, and with the site > included in the distribution, then things are very unhappy. > > Findbugs doesn't seem to be the same issue - it's LGPL, but the > reports don't appear to contain any LGPL JavaScript. > > Currently we have Cobertura in: > > commons-sandbox-parent/pom.xml > dbcp/pom.xml > io/pom.xml > jci/pom.xml > jexl/pom.xml > lang/pom.xml > math/pom.xml > betwixt/project.xml > codec/project.xml > collections/project.xml > collections_jdk5_branch/project.xml > configuration/project.xml > dbcp/project.xml > io/project.xml > lang/project.xml > math/project.xml > primitives/project.xml > validator/project.xml > > Looking at upcoming releases, IO does not distribute the site and > FileUpload does but doesn't have any suspicious looking reports. > > Do we want to play it safe and either not include Cobertura (and other > reports with similar problems), or not have downloaded sites? Or keep > it as it is and make this something we have to look at on every RC > check? > > Hen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
