On 20/02/2008, at 1:04 PM, sebb wrote:
On 19/02/2008, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the
following
issues
OUTSTANDING
Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to
me. Looking
through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also
see ASF.
The Notice file(s) in the jars should contain something like
Apache NMaven
Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
(i.e. as per
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/nmaven/tags/maven-dotnet-parent-0.15-incubating/NOTICE.txt
)
*not*
maven-archetype-dotnet-class-library
Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
IMO that does need to be fixed.
I don't think this is critical - but changing it to Apache NMaven or
Apache NMaven :: DotNet Class Library would certainly be an improvement.
Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to
remove
the itemization or whether this is necessary.
I think it's created by the remote resources plugin.
Just remove that and use the NOTICE file that is already in SVN.
I'm not sure it's incorrect now - if you look at the example that the
Apache licensing site gives, it is itemised:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt
as is the description for it's content:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
Likewise, I think the existing NOTICE files in the jars need to be
fixed.
.asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the
Maven
project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this
something that we
should be concerned with?
That's not at all urgent.
Agree.
SOLVED
License headers in test classes
However there are still quite a few other source files that don't have
headers, for example:
maven-dotnet.iml
maven-dotnet.ipr
These are generated by IDEA. I'm not sure why they are in SVN, but
they don't need licenses. They should be excluded from any source
distribution though.
archetypes/maven-archetype-class-library/src/main/resources/
archetype-resources/pom.xml
This is a template that will be used to generate another pom.xml, so
it shouldn't include the license as that'll appear in the output (and
the user may not want to license it as such)
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
