Sorry, I added it to the LICENSE file but forgot the rat exclusions. It is MIT licensed.
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 12:51 PM Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris is the: > > blur-console/src/main/webapp/less/selectivity-full.css > > Suppose to be Apache licensed? Meaning is it something we developed? Or > should it MIT? Rat is failing on blur-console because of it. > > Aaron > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Thanks Chris! > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I just pushed up a commit that replaces tagmanager.js with > selectivity.js > >> (MIT license). I've removed all traces of tagmanager and updated the > >> LICENSE file. > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM Chris Rohr <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Garrett, thanks for reference, however, the existing functionality > >> doesn't > >> > actually do anything in regards to building the queries for faceting. > >> It's > >> > purely a UI control to build up the pieces to facet on in a tagging > like > >> > interface. > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:57 AM Garrett Barton < > >> [email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Facetjs? Theres two out there with that name though. > >> >> On Jul 20, 2015 8:47 AM, "Chris Rohr" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > I can help take a look at an alternative. It is used for building > up > >> >> > facets in the search portion of the console. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:09 PM Tim Williams < > [email protected]> > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > Justin noticed in our RC that we include tagmanager.js, which is > >> >> > > category B. I'm not sure what role it plays in the console - > >> anyone > >> >> > > know of an alternative to it's functionality under an acceptable > >> >> > > license? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > --tim > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> >> > > From: Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > >> >> > > Date: Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM > >> >> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.4-incubating RC1 > >> >> > > To: [email protected] > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Hi, > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) until the MPL issue can be resolved / > >> >> > > explained, other issues can be fixed next release. For the MPL > >> issue > >> >> > > it may be that "For small amounts of source that is directly > >> consumed > >> >> > > by the ASF product at runtime in source form” may apply. [2] > >> >> > > > >> >> > > For the source release I checked: > >> >> > > - filename contains incubating > >> >> > > - signatures and hashes good > >> >> > > - DISCLAIMER exists > >> >> > > - LICENSE has minor issues + MPL issue [2] > >> >> > > - NOTICE good > >> >> > > - Some unexpected binaries in source (see below) > >> >> > > - All source file have headers > >> >> > > - Can compile form source? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > LiCENSE is missing: > >> >> > > - MIT licensed normalize.css (see > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/public/css/blurconsole.css > >> >> > > + > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/bootstrap/less/normalize.less) > >> >> > > - MIT/BSD licensed polyfill (see > >> ./docs/resources/js/respond.min.js) > >> >> > > > >> >> > > There is an issue with > >> >> > > ./blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/tagmanager/tagmanager.js as > >> this > >> >> > > is MPL licensed [2] which is weak copy left and considered a > >> category > >> >> > > B license. In this case it looks like it isn’t been handled > >> correctly > >> >> > > as it being included in source not binary form. I’m not sure how > >> this > >> >> > > should be handled given there is no compiled JS form. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > There are a couple of test files that contain compiled code, can > >> this > >> >> > > be produced via the build process? > >> >> > > > >> ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test1/test1.jar > >> >> > > > >> ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test2/test2.jar > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Something a little odd that caught my eye is all of the > >> >> > > ./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/*.jar.src > files. > >> Is > >> >> > > there any reason for these files to be in the source release? It > >> look > >> >> > > that they are used to generate the binary NOTICE file? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > For the binary release you may want to check the LICENSE as it is > >> >> > > identical to the source release [3]. For the binary NOTICE file a > >> >> > > minor issue in that there is no need to repeat "This product > >> includes > >> >> > > software developed by The Apache Software Foundation “ [4]. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Re compiling from source some instructions in the README would be > >> >> > > helpful as it seems a mvn install in the top directory may not do > >> what > >> >> > > is expected. (As far as I can see it seems to be doing a rat > check > >> and > >> >> > > nothing else?) > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > Justin > >> >> > > > >> >> > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep > >> >> > > 2. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > >> >> > > 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary > >> >> > > 4. > >> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product > >> >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [email protected] > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > > > >
