zyxxoo commented on code in PR #2100:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-hugegraph/pull/2100#discussion_r1094606158
##########
hugegraph-dist/release-docs/LICENSE:
##########
@@ -263,6 +263,7 @@ See licenses/ for text of these licenses.
(Apache License, Version 2.0) * Apache Log4j Core
(org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core:2.17.1 -
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/)
(Apache License, Version 2.0) * Apache Log4j SLF4J Binding
(org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-slf4j-impl:2.17.1 -
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-slf4j-impl/)
(Apache License, Version 2.0) * Apache Thrift
(org.apache.thrift:libthrift:0.9.2 - http://thrift.apache.org)
+ (Apache License, Version 2.0) * JanusGraph
(https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop)
Review Comment:
@WillemJiang
hi,
Our source code refers to the janusGraph source file, but doesn't refer the
jar dependency.
I have modified the source license & notice and binary license & notice to
declare it, but I'm a little unsure if i write the binary license in the write
way. The binary artifact doesn't have java source file. We don't refer to the
janusGraph's binary artifact (we only copy its source file, which becomes class
file in binary artifact).
For example:
we source code refers to the A project a.java source file
1. Wether the binary license needs to declare"a.class from
https://githu.com/A";
2. If we don't refer to A.jar (only source file), do we write "A
(https://github.com/A"; or "A (org.A:A:0.0.1 - https://github.com/A)"?
3. If archive file path is different between source path and binary
artifact, can we only copy source license to binary license?
I am looking forward to your suggestions to write these situations better.
Thanks a lot
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
