Hi folks!
I'm pretty sure this doesn't only hit Trinidad but also a lot other projects, so I like to trigger a discussion on this very topic. Usually we only ship JAR files, and the code in apache-parent should make sure that each file properly contains LICENSE and NOTICE files. Of course such a mechanism doesn't exist for WAR files which we ship for samples and stuff. With shipping WAR files there are 2 problematic issues 1.) those must contain LICENSE and NOTICE files. See the mail below how to solve this. 2.) we might also 'distribute' (in a legal sense) 3-rd party JAR files inside of the WARs WEB-INF/lib directory! This is a bummer, and in OWB, we completely disabled the deployment of our samples via maven because of that! You can get the sources in the source-distribution.zip, you can build it yourself, etc. But we don't ship any 3rd party JARs which are not developed inside the ASF this way. Why is this problematic: OWB for example needs javassist which is MPL licensed. MPL is perfectly fine as dependency as a lot other CategoryA and CategoryB licensed projects are[1]. But MPL needs certain attribution when you _distribute_ the project! WDYT? Is this feasible or MyFaces too? LieGrue, strub [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html ----- Forwarded Message ----- > From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > To: MyFaces Development <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Trinidad 2.0.1 > > Hi Scott! > > I'm sorry, but I fear I have to veto with a -1. > > trinidad-components-showcase.war (WAR!) > > has no NOTICE nor LICENSE files I could find. > > I know we shipped lots of WAR files in the past without those, but I only > recently became aware of this problem in OpenWebBeans where I had to re-roll > my > release too. > > This can easily get fixed by doing some packaging tricks > Please see the maven-war-plugin config of the OWB samples > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/trunk/samples/pom.xml > > The important part is > <webResources> <resource> <directory>.</directory> > <targetPath>META-INF</targetPath> <includes> > <include>LICENSE</include> <include>NOTICE</include> > </includes> </resource> </webResources> > > Otherwise the release looks fine so far. > > > txs LieGrue, > strub > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Scott O'Bryan <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: >> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 2:38 AM >> Subject: [VOTE] Release of Trinidad 2.0.1 >> >> Hi Everyone, >> >> I was running the tasks needed to get the Trinidad 2.0.1 release out and > now I >> need a vote as to whether everything looks good or not. I have committed > most >> of the most recent submitted patches and things look to be fairly stable. > There >> are a few patches outstanding, but I wanted to put those into trunk so that > they >> can get some more testing. >> >> Therefore, I would like to ask for a vote on this release. All of the > following >> should be ready for review: >> >> * The generated repository and assembly artifacts [1] >> * The generated source archive [2] >> * The updated svn repository [3] >> >> Please review the artifacts and vote according to the following: >> >> ------------------------------------------------ >> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits >> [ ] +0 >> [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released, >> and why.............. >> ------------------------------------------------ >> >> This vote will remain open for at least 72 hours. >> >> Thanks, >> Scott O'Bryan >> >> [1] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachemyfaces-072 >> [2] >> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachemyfaces-072/org/apache/myfaces/trinidad/trinidad/2.0.1/trinidad-2.0.1-source-release.zip >> [3] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/trinidad/tags/trinidad-2.0.1 >> >
