On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 07:52:48PM +0100, Bruno Harbulot wrote: > I'm not saying that the central repo should investigate each and every > case to check that it's indeed true, but it should make it mandatory to > have a licence at least so as to avoid to put software that is > mistakenly unattributed (and thus often in breach of the licence).
What is the URL for the license to software which is placed in the public domain? If you can answer that, then yes, I'd agree that it would be reasonable for a repo. to check that the POM lists a license and even that the link is not broken. What is *in* that target document is probably beyond the scope of the present software. If it's a copy of "Jabberwocky" or Lorem Ipsum, that's the submitter's problem. > As a publisher of a piece of software, I did put the LICENSE.txt file in > my bundle linked from <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAVENUPLOAD-2293> > (via the default settings of maven-repository-plugin 2.0 at the time), > having the expectation that it would be distributed along with the > artifacts in the bundle. What led you to believe that this would happen? If you put it into a src/main/resources directory then it should have been packed up into the archive, but I don't see anything which says that anything else shall be done with it. -- Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mw...@iupui.edu Balance your desire for bells and whistles with the reality that only a little more than 2 percent of world population has broadband. -- Ledford and Tyler, _Google Analytics 2.0_
pgppbMvNnITRI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
