On 1 November 2012 00:34, Chip Childers <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:49 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 31 October 2012 21:12, Robert Burrell Donkin >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Whisker[1] generates LICENSE and NOTICE documents from meta-data. An >>> optional source URL can be associated with each resource contained in a >>> distribution. Originally, this supported licenses which require the source >>> to be printed in the NOTICE but Apache CloudStack[2] would like to include a >>> source URL in the LICENSE. This would be unconventional but I'm not sure it >>> would be harmful. >>> >>> So, I'm leaning towards introducing a configuration allow this >>> >>> Opinions? Objections? >> >> The content of URLs can change, so provided the current content is >> included in the LICENSE file I don't see any harm in also including >> the URL from which it was derived. > > Actually, and please do correct me if I don't understand the whisker > meta-data correctly, we (the CloudStack project) are using the > "source" attribute to provide a URL from which the reader can access > the source code of a dependency or included software artifact. Have I > misunderstood that attribute?
Or maybe I have. >> However, I don't think the LICENSE file should contain only the URL. >> Apart from the fact that the content might vary, the end-user should >> not have to go fetch another file - the LICENSE file should be >> complete. > > Absolutely. The actual license needs to be in the LICENSE file. > >>> Robert >>> >>> [1] http://creadur.apache.org/whisker >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WHISKER-3 >>
