This seems wrong in several ways, as I study more how Eclipse uses these. So ignore this :-).
See other part of this thread that discussed this further, and Jira UIMA-2636. -Marshall On 2/4/2013 4:10 PM, Marshall Schor wrote: > It seems to me that the license displayed in the Eclipse update site installer > is typically shorter than the full Apache license, and includes a link to the > full license. I don't recall the pros/cons here. > > For instance, the "short" version used in the uimaj plugins is: > > Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor > license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for > additional information regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this > file to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not > use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of > the License at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0. Unless required by > applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License > is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY > KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language > governing permissions and limitations under the License. > > The version used in textmarker is the full text, including the appendix on how > to apply the Apache license to other works. I think, in any case, that > Appendix > should be omitted here. > > This is not a blocker, in my opinion, however. > > -Marshall > >
