Le 5/22/12 3:47 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit :
On 22/05/2012 09:44, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
On 21/05/2012 18:20, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Le 5/21/12 9:53 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit :
On 21/05/2012 07:33, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Hi guys,
just to inform you that some heavy discussions are going on about
what those files should contain and what a binary distribution
should contain. I'm not sure we will have a clear decision made
this week, but at least, some opinion are expressed.
This will slow down the 1.0.0-RC1 vote from incubator, but still
this is interesting in the long run.
I'll keep you informed.
In the mean time, keep going the good work!
Emmanuel,
what if we just include all transitive dependencies in L&N:
org.livetribe:livetribe-jsr223:jar:2.0.6
org.mybatis:mybatis:jar:3.0.6
xmlpull:xmlpull:jar:1.1.3.1
xpp3:xpp3_min:jar:1.1.4c / xpp3:xpp3:jar:1.1.4c
aopalliance:aopalliance:jar:1.0
asm:asm:jar:3.3.1
antlr:antlr:jar:2.7.7
dom4j:dom4j:jar:1.6.1
joda-time:joda-time:jar:2.0
with option to remove all these above in case the ongoing legal
discussion states so?
AFAIU, there are two things :
- sources distribution N&L files should only contain licenses of
elements we include. If we have copied some part of 3rd party source
into Syncope, then it should be present. But if we simply use some
3rd party tools, then we are not required to add them into the N&L
files. For generated sources files (ie, antlr), then we should
consider that we must add the references to antr into the N&L files
- binary distribution N&L files (ie, war files) should contain the
N&L for 3rd party lib we include into them.
- I'm not 100% sure that we should unzip all the added libs to get
all the licenses into the bin N&L files. To me, this is spurious, as
far as we distribute bins for convenience. It's up to the user to
understand what they are doing. Enough to say we have included lib
for X, Y or Z.
So, again, AFAIU, we should produce 2 different N&L files : the
first one for the source distribution, contaning very few elements,
and the second one included into the war.
Is anyone agrees with that ?
After a nice skype call with Emmanuel, here it goes how things
*should* be:
LICENSE-sources / NOTICE-sources
These files will be included in *sources.jar, *javadoc.jar and
*sources.tar.gz / *sources.zip
These files are the default ones as inherited by Apache parent POM.
(Side note: we can do so because we don't include source code from
other projects nor generate sources via, for example, ANTlr, nor -
finally - use 3rd party CSS for styling our javadocs)
LICENSE and NOTICE
These files will be included in all binary artifacts *war, *jar and
*classes.jar
These files are the ones currently in SVN + transitive dependencies, i.e.
org.livetribe:livetribe-jsr223:jar:2.0.6
org.mybatis:mybatis:jar:3.0.6
xmlpull:xmlpull:jar:1.1.3.1
xpp3:xpp3_min:jar:1.1.4c / xpp3:xpp3:jar:1.1.4c
aopalliance:aopalliance:jar:1.0
asm:asm:jar:3.3.1
antlr:antlr:jar:2.7.7
dom4j:dom4j:jar:1.6.1
joda-time:joda-time:jar:2.0
I'll try to implement this ASAP and then start another release attempt
(after canceling the current one at general@incubator).
I hope that's ok ! :)
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
