On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
- I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general
sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
files are
The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble
describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble
- it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an
example.
The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything
that's
That NOTICE file still contains additional text about Jetty and
HSQLDB, why is that needed? The Apache License section 4d describes
what must be included in the NOTICE and AIUI it says you only need to
include in your NOTICE the notices from Jetty and HSQLDB if you
distribute derivitave works of
It is true that we've created no derivative Jetty or HSQLDB works. But
the Apache License 4(d) section does not explicitly mention Jetty and
HSQLDB as not requiring NOTICE text, and my understanding is that the
license terms for those components require the text I have included in
NOTICE. I am
Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 2010-2011.
For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem
to have been any substantive changes made in 2011.
The leading blank lines need to be removed.
Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned
I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling
your instructions with this part of the Apache license:
(d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its
distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
include a readable
I've confirmed the following:
(1) The Jetty notice text I've included came from the source Jetty NOTICE file.
(2) The HSQLDB notice text I've included is NOT the same as the HSQLDB
license text, and very likely came from an HSQLDB NOTICE file also.
So, if I'm doing it wrong, at least I'm being
On Jan 8, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling
your instructions with this part of the Apache license:
(d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its
distribution, then any Derivative Works
Ok, so then it sounds like all of the current contents of NOTICE.txt
can technically be removed. Where should these go? LICENSE.txt?
README.txt? The circular file? I've received one recommendation for
each.
Karl
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Hi Karl,
For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL
that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see
you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just
copy the current contents into a new directory with a
One other note:
We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE]
thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's important to know what
we're VOTE'ing on is consistent with what's in SVN.
Honestly, as much as it would suck to spend another 2 hours of time,
I need to respin anyway because the bits in the archives need to
change, and thus all the signatures. The new bits also need to be
voted on by the community. I was simply trying to short-circuit the
process for editorial convergence on these three files.
I will start a new vote thread for RC6
I'd be happy to provide it.
Thanks,
Karl
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
One other note:
We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE]
thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's
Thanks very much Karl. Great work!
Cheers,
Chris
On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
I'd be happy to provide it.
Thanks,
Karl
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
One other note:
We probably should also see an SVN
On 8 January 2011 16:40, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and
LICENSE.txt. Any further comments?
As previously mentioned, all the files appear to have leading blank lines.
These should be removed.
The README file says:
(1) There already is a separate DISCLAIMER.txt. I have attached it
for your consideration.
(2) As discussed earlier, the LICENSE file already contains sections
for HSQLDB and Jetty; the stuff added to the end of the README came
from NOTICE files in those projects, and is not license material.
(3)
On 9 January 2011 02:33, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
(1) There already is a separate DISCLAIMER.txt. I have attached it
for your consideration.
OK.
(2) As discussed earlier, the LICENSE file already contains sections
for HSQLDB and Jetty; the stuff added to the end of the README
17 matches
Mail list logo
