I am referring to the modules. What I meant was if we have 25 modules and everyone has its own
license and notices file I'm pretty confident they'll get out of sync. It would be nice to have a
central place to pull the content from which should be modules/scripts/resources/*
What I meant by the notices being an issue is that a single notices file identifies what additional
licenses are in a module. So, it may or may not make sense for the Kernel module to have a
Bouncycastle NOTICE.
If its ok to havbe a complete NOTICES file that includes licenses that are not in a module then that
would be fine. It would be nice to say, "Geronimo-Kernel may include one or more of the following
elements." If we have to be precise on a module by module basis then I think that will be a problem.
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Jul 17, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Well, I think adding the files to every module is potentially a
problem. I think the release should have a central place all modules
derive their LICENSE file from. The NOTICIES file is a different animal.
Matt,
What "modules" are you referring to? All of our generated jar files
(.e.g geronimo-kernel-1.1.jar) should contain LICENSE and NOTICE files.
Hrrm, I just looked at two 1.1 jars and they only contain LICENSE files.
We also need a LICENSE and NOTICE file at the base of our distributions.
These should contain all necessary license and notice information for
all of the Geronimo code built and included in our distribution. The
license and notice file also need to contain license and notice
information for all jar files, or other artifacts, that we include in
our distribution (e.g. asm jar, castor jar, etc...).
Or, are you instead referring to "modules" as in CAR's? If so, then they
are a different animal. However, I don't think we're released from any
licensing requirements.
Given the guidelines in
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
(see the "Can I distribute a raw artifact?" section at the bottom), I
think that any downloadable artifact (distribution, car, jar, war, ear,
etc) that we "release" to ibiblio should have appropriate license and
notice files (alternatively, we stop releasing the artifact).
--kevan
Jason Dillon wrote:
If we want to keep these guys in the jars, then we should move them
to their standard src/main/resources/META-INF/* locations so that
they get picked up automatically.
--jason
On Jul 16, 2006, at 5:27 PM, John Sisson wrote:
Jason Dillon wrote:
Um... when were these ever included in the module's jars before?
--jason
On Jul 16, 2006, at 5:04 PM, John Sisson wrote:
Jason Dillon wrote:
Does each module really need LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt?
Or can we just have this at the top-level of the project?
I'd rather have less duplicate files to maintain...
Any comments?
--jason
I think they are needed as each downloadable jar (which each
module has) should contain the license and notice files. Same
with source archives, which AFAIK maven can produce for each
individual module for use by IDE debuggers etc.
John
I just checked and if you look at geronimo-activation-1.1.jar it
should contain META-INF\LICENSE.TXT . It is a problem that the
NOTICE.txt file isn't also included.
We should add a JIRA for the 1.1.1 release for that.
John
