Thank you for the update. So, I think that we have 2 options. 1. Copy all licenses directly to "LICENSE" file. 2. Copy all licenses to "/licenses" and add a pointer to LICENSE file.
In that case, I think the current pr should be good enough (I also separated out LICENSE-binary and NOTICE-binary). For a source code release, we plan to include the original LICENSE, NOTICE while we will include LICENSE-binary, NOTICE-binary for binary release. @Felix @Kishore Can you go over the finalized pr when you find the time? Again, I really appreciate for your help. https://github.com/apache/incubator-pinot/pull/3722 Best, Seunghyun On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:31 PM Felix Cheung <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually I’m going to retract the whole thing I said. > > Seems like it should carry it under license for: > > https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/bf4199e261c3c8dd2970e2a154c97b46fb339f02 > > ________________________________ > From: Felix Cheung <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:20 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Requesting a review for updating license & notice information > > Hi - I believe it’s ok not to include standard passive license too. I > think I could some pointer on that in the PR where we discussed. > > > ________________________________ > From: kishore g <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:18 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Requesting a review for updating license & notice information > > I think that should work. Olivier, do you see any issues with that? > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 5:51 PM Seunghyun Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Felix and Kishore, > > > > Can you guys confirm that if I can remove copied license files for MIT, > BSD > > based on http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps > ? > > > > My understanding from the above document is that for MIT, BSD > dependencies, > > it is sufficient to add pointers in LICENSE file. > > > > However, I'm a bit confused given that the example actually points the > full > > license > > > > This product bundles SuperWidget 1.2.3, which is available under a > > "3-clause BSD" license. For details, see *deps/superwidget/.* > > > > > > As long as we don't violate the license issue, I can go ahead of removing > > copied license files in "/licenses" for MIT, BSD related libaries. > > > > Best, > > Seunghyun > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:53 PM Felix Cheung <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for doing that and sending this note. > > > > > > I will help check today. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Seunghyun Lee <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 3:42 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Requesting a review for updating license & notice information > > > > > > Hi Mentors, > > > > > > I have recently tracked down all dependencies that we bundle for our > > > distribution and came up with license, notice files for Pinot project. > I > > > followed Apache Spark's approach since it provides the detailed > > > documentation on how to build license, notice files. > > > > > > Can someone look into the following pull request so that we can have > some > > > initial feedbacks before we start to work on the release process? > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pinot/pull/3722 > > > > > > Best, > > > Seunghyun > > > > > >
