Hi Fabian, thanks for the check!
2013/3/15 Fabian Christ <christ.fab...@googlemail.com> > 2013/3/14 Sebastian Schaffert <sschaff...@apache.org>: > > Uploading a new version. It is again available at > > > > http://people.apache.org/~sschaffert/3.0.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT/ > > I downloaded the latest > apache-marmotta-3.0.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT-src.tar.gz > > - Imported KEYS - verification okay > - NOTICE.txt > The NOTICE file is meant to contain additional notices for included > third party sources whose licenses require such a notice. Now, there > are some notices in the NOTICE.txt like this one "software based on > IzPack licensed under Apache License 2.0". I think, for Apache > licensed code this is not needed. On the other hand, some BSD licensed > code requires a notice. You should have a look at the exact license > text to find out what exactly should be mentioned as a notice. > Only the BSD code licensed under the old (original) BSD license with advertisement clause requires such notice (see http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html). All code we included is published under the New BSD license without advertisement clause, so they are not added to NOTICE. Is this incorrect? > > - LICENSE.txt > Just pointing to a URL for license details is not enough, like "For > details, see https://github.com/tristan/jsonld-java";. The idea of the > LICENSE file is to have all the license information included without > the need to have to look anywhere else. So please, include the > original license texts there. > I copied this over from http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html (Bundling Permissively Licensed Dependencies) where it says that for MIT license and for 3-clause BSD (i.e. without advertisement, or "New BSD") the pointer is sufficient. How did you handle this in your projects? > > That's it for the moment. I continue building Marmotta and provide > more comments when the time allows it. > > Best, > - Fabian > -- > Fabian > http://twitter.com/fctwitt >
