Yeah well ...
But in the end ... if we actually do include code by takari isn't if fair to
mention it?
After all it's not just the Java code the wrapper scripts themselves should
count too.
And in the end it's a one-time addition that will stick there for the rest of
time.
So give it 5 minutes (max) of work and we're on the safe side. Better than
loosing
Hours in email discussions ;-)
I'll even add that Notice to the projects I added my file to (even if
technically it would
Be Apache licensed code) It just takes too much explaining why these 3 PLC4X,
Edgent
And IoTDB ...
Chris
Am 14.02.19, 07:47 schrieb "Adrian Cole" <adrian.f.c...@gmail.com>:
> Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to
> eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also
> an additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-)
imho it helps in so far as the work itself (thanks!) and also a subject
matter expert. I see this file as useful but incidental.
If we set a precedent towards having to re-link this file in our NOTICE..
you might expect this to cause a flurry of low value activity across every
project that uses it, to do the same, or projects like us feeling unfair
burden by accident of the month we joined the incubator. ex if we did
early last year surely this discussion would haven't happened (as others
graduated before the more recent scrutiny of incubees.
If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask you
to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would
also have to do this for gradle etc.
So basically if we accept that the new norm is this level of detail on
incidental files, we likely have more volunteer time spent policing and
remediation. We could at least tell them what to say.
would it be "this includes source generated by the takari maven plugin"?
and of course if we say this, the next cruft is explaining gradle etc.
do we want to do this? we can but is it really worthwhile?
you tell me
