On Apr 14, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Valentin Mahrwald wrote:

> 
> On 14 Apr 2010, at 17:39, Kevan Miller wrote:
> 
>> A few general notes to the community about Apache releases, since this is 
>> the first release. Fundamentally, release notes apply to source code. 
>> Although the svn tag is typically what you think about for a "release". The 
>> actual release, from an ASF perspective, is the source archive prepared by 
>> the release manager. Quite complicated in this case, since there are so many 
>> release archives (e.g. 
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-010/org/apache/aries/blueprint/blueprint/0.1-incubating/blueprint-0.1-incubating-source-release.zip
>>  ) Actally building all of these projects is a pain in the rump...
>> 
>> BTW, I sometimes diff the source "release" archive against the svn tag. Note 
>> that several of the release archives contain a DEPENDENCY file that isn't in 
>> svn. I don't see an issue releasing with the DEPENDENCY file, just pointing 
>> out that there can be differences...
>> 
>> I've sampled the signature/checksums -- they look good. RAT output looks 
>> good. Build is painful, but worked.
>> 
>> I see a few issues with the LICENSE files, however:
>> 
>> 1) jpa-0.1-incubating includes two dual-licensed files (persistence-xsd.rsrc 
>> and persistence_2_0-xsd.rsrc). The LICENSE in the jar file properly reflects 
>> this. However, the files are also in the source. So, they also need to be 
>> included in the source LICENSE file
>> 2) Since Apache will not redistribute these files under GPL, we must 
>> explicitly choose the license we are applying to these files. As the license 
>> explains in these two files by including the following: "[Contributor] 
>> elects to include this software in this distribution under the [CDDL or GPL 
>> Version 2] license."
> 
> So if I understand these two points correctly, we need to have the same 
> license provisos that are currently in 
> jpa-0.1-incubating/jpa-container/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/LICENSE.vm
>  and NOTICE.vm also as part of the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the 
> jpa-0.1-incubating folder. Or should there be a separate LICENSE and NOTICE 
> file for the jpa-container project because it is the only one with the extra 
> external licenses?

Hi Valentin,
Good question. The former, IMO. jpa-0.1-incubating is the "project" being 
released. The root directory (i.e. tags/jpa-0.1-incubating/) should contain the 
LICENSE/NOTICE information which applies to the source for that "project". 
Unless there were explicit instructions in LICENSE file, I would not expect 
someone to search sub-directories (e.g. jpa-container) to find additional 
license information covering the source distribution. The .vm files may or may 
not be necessary after the root license/notice files are updated. I forget the 
exact mechanics on how they work. If they are in appended to the 
jpa-0.1-incubating/LICENSE (or NOTICE) file, they would now represent redundant 
information...

--kevan

Reply via email to