My thinking of this so far was that the repository would contain only a very limited information necessary for the (binary or source) build to produce the correct LICENSE and NOTICE for the given artefact. So, for a module whose (source) code is under Apache License without anything special (which should be the majority, ideally all), we wouldn't need LICENSE for each module. We may need NOTICE (or notice.txt) for some more modules. For external binaries, we always should have a -license.txt file, and also add -notice.txt if needed (if such notice would need to be part of the binary artefact). The build would then figure out the the modules that are in the given artefact (could be one as in NBM or many in other cases) and would compose the correct files.
(We also need a composite LICENSE and NOTICE at the top-level of the source repo.) I hope this should minimize the need to manually maintain too many files. I was planning to look at the build changes when I have time, unless someone else is willing to do that. Jan On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Dave Schoorl <dscho...@bkwi.nl> wrote: > Hi, > > Just a quick question for my own clarity and understanding, while > reviewing the Modules list for NETBEANS-54: should a Netbeans module in > incubator-netbeans repository always contain an Apache License file in it's > root? Because a module can be released / updated on it's own and thus is an > artifact released by Apache that needs to contain proper licensing? > > And how about a notice file (when appropriate in case of external > dependencies)? > > Thanks and sorry for this potentially silly question. > > /Dave
