On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:32 AM, ant elder <antel...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür > <m...@farewellutopia.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür > >> <m...@farewellutopia.com> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > >> > bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <r...@apache.org > > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > ...The reason the license files is not at the root is that we are > >> >> releasing a > >> >> > few dozen modules which are released together for voting > convenience > >> >> > but > >> >> > could also released separately. I suggest to add a note in the > readme > >> >> > pointing out that the some modules contain additional license and > >> >> > notice > >> >> > files.... > >> >> > >> >> I agree with that, but it doesn't require cutting a new release IMO - > >> >> releasing with an open issue in Clerezza's jira about this would be > >> >> fine from my Clerezza mentor's point of view. > >> >> > >> > > >> > I've added a README in the root, see > >> > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/clerezza/trunk/parent/README.txt > >> > > >> > Also I've added a project to create an assembly of that contains only > >> > the > >> > sources of the modules of an active build project, it is here: > >> > > >> > > >> > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/clerezza/trunk/parent/clerezza-jar-resource-bundle/ > >> > > >> > With these I plan to prepare a new release candidate tomorrow. > >> > > >> > Reto > >> > >> Its not clear if that will change the binary distribution so just a > >> quick note to remind about that as it also needs to note all the > >> licenses it uses. > >> (i did check on you dev list and it doesn't look like the respin has > >> happen yet so hopefully that isn't an inconvenience) > >> > > > > Yes I adapted the NOTICE of the launcher (i.e. the one in the binary > distro) > > as follows: > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/clerezza/trunk/parent/platform.launcher.tdb/NOTICE?view=markup > > > > Cheers, > > Reto > > > Thanks Ant, for looking at this this in such detail. After 4 candidates had to be dismissed for license reasons it would be good to have this things fixed for the next release candidate. > I don't think the NOTICE file is the correct place for these, and i > don't think thats enough to document the licenses that apply. > What would the right place be then? > As one example, the binary release clerezza-tdb-distribution.zip > contains a big jar platform.launcher.tdb-0.5-incubating.jar which > embeds other jars, for example it contains > servlet-api-3.0.20100224.jar, which is EPL licensed so that needs to > be mentioned in clerezza-tdb-distribution.zip. > Is there a way to systematically find out the license of such transitive maven dependencies? The jar you mention contains no license or notice file, it contains a maven pom file without licensing information. It seems to be part of the pre-eclipse jetty release, on the mortbay website I read that jetty is apache licensed. Other jetty files are in org/eclipse and thus probably EPL. > > There are many jars within jars using various licenses included in > clerezza-tdb-distribution.zip which also need to be mentioned. Ask > your mentors for help if the requirements aren't clear, or at least > ask them to vote here if they disagree. > I added our mentors to the cc, hoping they step into the conversation and that I eventually know what step I need to do for a legally acceptable release. Cheers, Reto
