On Sep 1, 2007, at 8:34 PM, David Jencks wrote:
I've been working on generating geronimo-plugin.xml from the
pom.xml and am really confused about what should be in some of the
elements. I wonder if we need to add more information for more
clarity.
For instance, the dojo configs currently say:
<url>http://dojotoolkit.org/</url>
<author>Dojo Foundation</author>
<license osi-approved="true">BSD and Academic Free License
v2.1</license>
This is appropriate for dojo itself but I think its misleading for
our repackaging of dojo to run in geronimo.
Since we are distributing the car file from apache I think the
license has to be asl2. That's certainly what we're including in
the car file itself.
Similarly the dojo guys don't know anything about our distribution
so pointing to them seems a bit misleading.
What I can set up automatically from the pom uses the info there,
which I think is more appropriate. I get
<url>http://geronimo.apache.org/</url>
<author>The Apache Geronimo development community</author>
<license osi-approved="true">The Apache Software License,
Version 2.0</license>
I think it would be more appropriate to put the stuff about the
dojo organization in the description or in some additional optional
"content-author" type elements.
thoughts?
Agreed that the geronimo-plugin.xml should reference the Apache
Geronimo project and the the Apache license info. The plugin, itself,
is covered by multiple licenses (since it contains both Geronimo and
Dojo artifacts). As such, it might be appropriate to reference both
projects...
Looking at the dojo jetty/tomcat configs, we're not handling the
license/notice files very well. IMO, the META-INF/LICENSE.txt file
should contain both the ASL V2 license and the Dojo licenses. The
META-INF/NOTICE.txt should contain the Apache Geronimo copyright
notice and the Dojo notice.
--kevan
