----- Original Message ----
> From: ant elder <antel...@apache.org>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: cassandra-...@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:05:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE RESULTS] was: [VOTE] Release cassandra 0.4.0-beta1
>
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Joe Schaeferwrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >
> >> From: Joe Schaefer
> >> To: general@incubator.apache.org; antel...@apache.org
> >> Cc: cassandra-...@incubator.apache.org
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 10:58:16 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE RESULTS] was: [VOTE] Release cassandra 0.4.0-beta1
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----
> >>
> >> > From: ant elder
> >> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >> > Cc: cassandra-...@incubator.apache.org
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 10:31:57 AM
> >> > Subject: Re: [VOTE RESULTS] was: [VOTE] Release cassandra 0.4.0-beta1
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:01 PM, sebbwrote:
> >> > > On 18/08/2009, Eric Evans wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The vote is now closed with the following results:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> * +1 votes: 3 (Matthias Wessendorf, Ant Elder, Ian Holsman)
> >> > >> * 0 votes: 0
> >> > >> * -1 votes: 0
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The vote passes.
> >> > >
> >> > > I wish to raise an objection - there are several 3rd party libraries
> >> > > in the binary release which don't have have corresponding licenses in
> >> > > the LICENSE file.
> >> > >
> >> > > Furthermore, the NOTICE file fails to credit any of the 3rd party
> >> > > libraries, apart from Groovy.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Sebb, as has been said here on this vote thread, legal-discuss@, and
> >> > done in previous releases from other TLPs and poddlings, it doesn't
> >> > need to do either of those. The LICENSEs _are_ included in separate
> >> > license files and that is an OK approach. And AFAICT none of the 3rd
> >> > party dependencies require any mention in the NOTICE file, for example
> >> > the LEGAL-59 JIRA agrees nothing is required for the BSD license.
> >>
> >> I would like to see at least a mention of the lib/licenses directory in
> >> the LICENSE file. Moreover the LICENSE listed for the Thrift component
> >> is questionable since Thrift has never formally released anything under
> >> the Apache License and THRIFT-387 has now been reopened, which certainly
> >> affects the licensing of the java TProcessorFactory components distributed
> >> by the cassandra candidate.
> >
> > The distributed libthrift.jar is also missing a LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt
> > in its META-INF dir.
> >
> >
>
> Though that is only required if the libthrift.jar is to be distributed
> separately, eg from a Maven repository, which isn't the case at the
> moment.
Agreed that that aspect isn't essential here. The real issue is to figure out
what the licensing terms are on the TProcessorFactory component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
