I've already committed this change in r808406 with Oliver's approval. In message <4a967dc9.1060...@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes: > > On 27/Aug/2009 11:29, Mark Hindess wrote: > > I also updated APR during this milestone. (However, the > > LICENSE/NOTICE sections were missing already AFAICT.) I'd like to > > commit the appended patch to fix this. > > I believe the reason is that we are not redistributing these > dependencies in the source builds.
The zlib notice has been in the NOTICE/THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.txt file since M1 and that is a similar downloaded dependency? > Which raises the thorny question, are you trying to gather the > licenses and notices for the source artifact we are going to vote > on and release, or for the binary which contains copies of the > dependencies we drag in? Yes! ;-) Both. Currently LICENSE/NOTICE files at each top-level (classlib, jdktools, vm and federated build[0]) are used when we use the source artifacts to create corresponding binary artifacts. The quick fix would be: 1) accept that the source artifact has "too much" information in its LICENSE/NOTICE files, 2) not create any binaries and remove the associated entries, or 3) derive separate LICENSE/NOTICE files for use in binaries (patch welcome ;-) I vote for 1) for this release since we've accepted this since M1 (zlib is a binary not source dependency). Regards, Mark. [0] If "svn co" is a release and we support working at the classlib/module/* level then perhaps we need to create the 30+ LICENSE/NOTICE files in the modules too.