I really hate depending on anything SNAPSHOT during a release. Although of course you could give it a date-based version, just creating a new maven plugin for that for the first OpenCMIS release seems overkill. Can't we do things partially by hand for now?
Anyway, ok for the code freeze at 3PM CET. Florent On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Gabriele Columbro <gabri...@apache.org> wrote: > Hey guys, > quick update on this one: as Florian mentioned, working on the assumption > the Category B licenses require a pointer to source code in NOTICE (apart > from the mention in DEPENDENCIES), I have a working solution which allows > maven to produce the notice file in the proper way. > Basically I'm using a custom version of the apache-jar-resource-bundle, > which lists in NOTICE all the CDDL licensed packages (CDDL is the only > Category B dependency we have). > > Provided that I will pick this us on the Maven Dev list for a possible > contribution, a quick solution for now is to: > > - create a top level project (out of the release, at the same level of the > tck [1]), called chemistry-jar-resource-bundle > - add the custom NOTICE.vm file there and deploy a SNAPSHOT to > repository.apache.org > - depend on it by our build and use it in the maven-remote-resource-plugin > config > > I'll perform this right away, unless you guys have some concern. I can > later then proceed with the release (ideally I could call a code freeze, > let's say, by 3PM CET ? ) > > Let me know your thoughts, > Gab > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/chemistry/ > > > > On Sep 9, 2010, at 3:17 PM, Florian Müller wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Gab and my interpretation of the Apache third-party rules [1] is that all >> dependencies with Category B licences have to be mentioned in the NOTICE >> files with a link to the source code. >> >> We have a bunch of CDDL dependencies. The names and links are already in >> the DEPENDENCIES files. We think copying the CDDL entries to NOTICE files >> should sufficient. >> >> >> Any comments? Experts? >> >> >> - Florian >> >> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html >> >> >> >> On 08/09/2010 14:59, Nick Burch wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Gabriele Columbro wrote: >>>> >>>> One question to conclude: referring to Nick's comments at [4], do you >>>> think we should have anything else in NOTICE for all packages? In >>>> other words, which of the licenses mentioned in the various >>>> DEPENDENCIES files actually require a NOTICE? >>> >>> The NOTICE file should contain as little as possible. Everything else >>> should go in DEPENDENCIES, a readme, the website etc >>> >>> The reason for this is that every downstream user has to include >>> everything in our NOTICE file in their own notices. So, we want it to >>> include all the required notices of our upstream dependencies, along >>> with our own notice. However, we don't want to full the NOTICE file up >>> with things that aren't required, as we don't want to burden our users! >>> >>> To review the NOTICE files, take a look at what's in there, and compare >>> that to the dependencies list (which is hopefully correct, since maven >>> generated it!). The notice file should have our notice in it, and after >>> that any dependency ones. If a dependency is under a license that >>> requires a notice, it should be there. (If not, it shouldn't. The main >>> apache 3rd party licenses page may give some help on this) >>> >>> Does this make sense to everyone? >>> >>> Nick >> > > -- > > Gabriele Columbro > Alfresco Software, Ltd. > > http://www.mindthegab.com > http://twitter.com/mindthegabz > > " Keyboard not found. Press F1 to continue. " > > > > -- Florent Guillaume, Director of R&D, Nuxeo Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM) http://www.nuxeo.com http://www.nuxeo.org +33 1 40 33 79 87
