Bernd Fondermann ha scritto:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/0.2RC2/
please take a look and see if there's any more issues
NOTICE.base and LICENSE.apache to me seem like left-over artifacts
because the *.txt files are also right there.
This is because of tricky policy requirement from ASF.
NOTICE.base is different from NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.apache is different
from LICENSE.txt.
The basic difference is that NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt are intended to
declare the credits and licenses for the full src tree in svn and in the
source release (and the binary release if it includes the same
dependencies), while the NOTICE.base and LICENSE.apache contains the
basic NOTICE/LICENSE tuple for the jars distributions that do not ship
any dependency and do not require any added credit/license.
ASF suggest us to not use only one big NOTICE/LICENSE including the
largest set of dependencies
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-27).
My opinion is that this is a complex requirement that make the releasing
process/review even more difficult, but as long as we have only 2 of
them (complete, and jar only) I can live with it. I'll fight any more
strict policy, but here is not the place for this. Join legal-discuss
for this.
You can see NOTICE.txt includes credits for bnd and junit so it is
needed only in the src.zip package because we don't have them in the
bin.zip and the jars we distribute.
Also LICENSE.txt includes the full junit license, too, while
LICENSE.apache is used in packages not including junit (all but src.zip).
In mime4j we use the same technique but there we don't have
LICENSE.apache and NOTICE.base because we use the
maven-remote-resources-plugin to include LICENSE and NOTICE in our
artifacts with no included dependencies.
In current jsieve release we do the same because Robert decided to use
the m2 build for this (so you see that NOTICE and LICENSE used in jars
are not the LICENSE.aapche and NOTICE.base, but are similar files
generated by maven), but they are still there because they are used by
the ant build.
As long as we document what is the official build too (the one we use to
make releases) we can even remove this NOTICE/LICENSE handling in the
unofficial build tool, but as long as we have mantainers for both builds
there is no need to decide this.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
