Hi Ian, 2009/5/5 Ian Boston <[email protected]>: > some comments. > Looking at the source assembly. > There is no LICENSE or NOTICE in the top level directory, consequently there > are some subfolders that don't appear to be covered by a license.
I could see two options: - aggregate all LICENSEs/ NOTICEs on root - just put ASL on root and add specific LICENSEs in sub dirs. NOTICE on root will be generic and will refer to specific NOTICEs in sub dirs. I am in favour of the last option. > > Looking at the Java assembly. > ==================== > In the README, > " > Memory: > No minimum requirement. > Disk: > No minimum requirement. > " > Not exactly true, someone might think they could run this on a phone... > (they probably could, who know why they would want to :)) Agree > Memory: > 128MB Minimum > Disk > 128MB Minimum I think 32MB is enough for the diskspace (lets try to unzip tarballs) > ===================== > In the war file: > Is it worth adding a line to the NOTICE file so that those expecting to > see 3rd party libs listed there will go to the right place. > "This package includes bundled 3rd party dependencies which are listed in > the DEPENDENCIES file." This file is generated by the org.apache:apache-jar-resource-bundle:1.4, which is compliant with legal-discuss (see thread on d...@maven in march 08) > ===================== > > In features-jar > The NOTICE and dependencies contain no mention of the OpenSocial spec, I > think there may be some javascript from there and certainly we should > reference > http://code.google.com/apis/opensocial/terms.html > > ===================== > > In gadgets-jar > Similarly we should probably reference > http://code.google.com/apis/gadgets/docs/terms.html > > ===================== For both, I think it will be better to include the following project (using ASL) This product includes software (opensocial-resources) developed by Google (http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/0.8/) > > Other than that IMHO it looks Ok. > The changes to the NOTICE files are only a suggestion since I noticed that > on the last release there were those that thought only NOTICE and LICENSE > were valid locations. Just as LICENSE references NOTICE, if NOTICE > referenced DEPENDENCIES they might be more willing to accept. No worries, suggestions are always welcome. Our mentors will validate the tarballs during the release vote. > I hope I haven't opened a can of worms on the references to the Gadget and > OpenSocial spec's. Thanks, Vincent
