> I understand that convenience binaries might some issues with uberjars
when
we go that route for 1.0. But is there any issue with the uberjars as
things currently stand? I was under the impression we are OK because we
don't distribute them.
My impression is that this incorrect and it was the
So, since NiFi does produce binaries, they require NOTICE and LICENSE
updates in two places:
- the ‘package’ itself. With nifi usually this is the .nar file ( nars are
just jars ).
- the nifi-assembly module which builds the .zip binary distribution.
It is normal and expected during reviews
There is a distinction. The dependencies_with_url.csv does manage to make
sure our dependencies (and transitive dependencies) are appropriately
accounted for. What we also need to do is make that any changes (if
necessary) to the LICENSE and NOTICE files also make it in there. For
example,
I'm not sure I fully understand what is out of date. I know I have
personally modified our licenses a couple times in the past and used an
automated script that, I believe, Casey Stella had created for doing the
check. I even made some improvements to it a long ways back. It rips
through the maven
Hi all,
As mentioned on the release voting thread, there was a Slack discussion
around our LICENSE and NOTICE file likely being outdated because they
haven't been actively kept up to date since graduation. I suggested on the
vote thread that we proceed with the current release, but consider it a
