On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:18:11 GMT, Man Cao <m...@openjdk.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > Could anyone help review the addition of LICENSE file to hsdis directory? > > -Man
Thank you for pointing out the difference between hsdis and other 3rd party code. > src/java.desktop/share/native/libsplashscreen/libpng/LICENSE seems like a > mistake. There should be a libpng.md file in java.desktop/share/legal instead. Yes, src/java.desktop/share/legal/libpng.md already exists and contains the same content. Is hsdis the only part of code in OpenJDK that is written by the OpenJDK community, but not licensed under GPLv2+Classpath Exception? If so, we cannot say which way is consistent. I do think a separate license file for hsdis is better, as the top-level LICENSE file does not mention the UPLv1 license, and it doesn't apply to hsdis. Having a separate license file is also a common approach for open source software. What do you think? Again if it takes a lot of your time to get legal approval for this, then it is probably not worth it. Or could we rename the file to something like hsdis-license.txt so it doesn't need legal review? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7649
