On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:37 PM Justin Mclean <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > All mostly correct and I’ve clarified a few things where needed. > > > Because the bundled Google Guava and Netty both contain no bundled > > subcomponents under other licenses > > Well Netty does contain 3rd party bundled sub component but it incorrectly > list then in NOTICE not LICENSE. I don't think you include any of these > however. > > > Because Netty does supply a NOTICE file, and it is Apache licensed, we > > should analyze whether we should modify NOTICE file. > > Yes. > > > According to "MODIFICATIONS TO NOTICE", because Dubbo has relocated > > several classes from Netty, and these files contain copyright notice, > > we must modify NOTICE file to add Netty copyright notifications and > > then change the source file header to remove the copyright notice. > > Relocated copyright are those where the copyright in the header has been > removed with permission, usually as part of a software grant [1], that’s not > the case here. > > > That is my understanding of why we should add Netty's copyright notice > > to NOTICE file. > > Close, but it's because it’s in the their NOTICE file and the contain of that > NOTICE file (that are needed) need to be carried over. > > > 1. The source file header of classes under > > org.apache.dubbo.common.threadlocal should be changed by removing the > > copyright Notice from Netty. > > Please don’t. Never remove or modify headers from 3rd party files unless you > have explicit permission from them to do so. [2]
So does that mean it is safe to keep the copyright notice as long as we add it to NOTICE file? > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers > 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party > -- Best Regards！ Huxing
