On 1/25/2013 5:20 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Am 25.01.2013 um 16:37 schrieb Marshall Schor <[email protected]>: >> On 1/25/2013 9:27 AM, Peter Klügl wrote: >>> On 25.01.2013 14:40, Peter Klügl wrote: >>>> On 25.01.2013 14:02, Jörn Kottmann wrote: >>>>> On 01/25/2013 01:13 PM, Peter Klügl wrote: >>>>>> If I undestand that correctly, then I have to remove ANTLR and htmlparser >>>>>> from the NOTICE/LICENSE in the top level project since they are both not >>>>>> part of the source release. Then, I have to add NOTICE/LICENSE files >>>>>> (with >>>>>> ANTLR and htmlparser) to src/main/readme/ in the top level project and to >>>>>> the uimaj-ep-textmarker-engine project since those two binaries will >>>>>> contain the third party libraries. The other plugins also need their own >>>>>> NOTICE/LICENSE files in src/main/readme/ since they contain the icons. Is >>>>>> that correct? Is there a shortcut, something that influences maven what >>>>>> to >>>>>> put in those files, or which file to copy? >>>>> +1, sounds good. >>>> Unfortunately, this did not work. I added individual LICENSE/NOTICE files >>>> to >>>> src/main/readme in uimaj-ep-textmarker-engine but the binary just contains >>>> the default files and additionally files with ".txt" extension and the same >>>> content. The -sources jar contains also only the default files. >>>> >>>> Any ideas? >>>> >>> Can someone verify that the information in [1] is correct? I am searching >>> for >>> an example with similar preconditions and correct LICENSE/NOTICE files. If I >>> take a look at the latest official release of the SDK, then I can see the >>> LICENSE/NOTICE files of the top project, e.g., with the mention of the >>> icons. >>> However, the plugin org.apache.uima.caseditor_2.4.0 has only the default >>> LICENSE/NOTICE files in its META-INF folder (no mention of the icons). The >>> LICENSE/NOTICE files in src/main/readme (top level) contain the information >>> about the icons. >> Right. When you get your packaging fixed, I think we'll need to change this >> project too. You're the first one pioneering this :-) > > This whole fuzz about NOTICE/README files of third-party dependencies > included in OSGi bundles is necessary only because many third-party JARs do > actually *not* contain NOTICE/README files inside them, right? I mean, if > every third-party JAR carried these files, there wouldn't be any necessity to > repeat that information in our files, would there?
I think many people find this fuzzy. There have been recent discussions on Jira's in legal-discuss about this (referenced below), and a new page has been added - a licensing-howto [1]. According to [1] you need to "bubble up" notices (that apply in your particular case) from dependent things you include. [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html (Scroll to bottom) This includes the step: Perform a recursive traversal of the product's dependency chain, starting with direct dependencies and continuing through all child dependencies. For any dependency whose bits are bundled, consider whether LICENSE and NOTICE need to be modified. (DO NOT modify LICENSE or NOTICE for dependencies whose bits are not bundled.) Here are the two Jiras about this, for more background and discussion: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-125 and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-155 -Marshall > > Cheers, > > -- Richard >
