Andrew and I just pushed updates to the license files that should address all of the issues that Tim brought up.
Chris On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: > Having the path in the LICENSE file seems like a good idea. > Are there any tools used by other apache projects to generate the license > file on release? It seems like it could be automated to avoid this > situation in the future > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Tim, > > > > > > The 3 you can't find are from the original blur console, they can be > > > removed. We will need to add the 3 MIT ones. I can do this if you all > > > want. What is the process? Does this hold up the release? > > > > Hey Chris, > > Yes, licensing issues are blocking - it needs to get fixed before a > > release so probably fix it as soon as you can and lets roll a new > > candidate. FWIW, the three that I noticed not being accounted for > > were a spot check, not comprehensive. I'd do a find . -name *.js and > > just do a check against the license file with these guidelines[1] in > > mind. > > > > On a side note, I'd really like to go back to putting the path (e.g. > > ./blur-console/src/main/webapp/js/utils/jquery.event.gevent.js) on a > > new line under the mention in LICENSE to aid in both find things that > > should be accounted for and things that are in License but should not > > be... thoughts? > > > > Thanks, > > --tim > > > > [1] - http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps > > >
