On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Tim Ellison <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 17/08/16 11:40, ellisonanne wrote: > > Github user ellisonanne commented on a diff in the pull request: > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pirk/pull/65# > discussion_r75099656 > > > > --- Diff: LICENSE --- > > @@ -199,4 +199,64 @@ > > distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, > > WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or > implied. > > See the License for the specific language governing permissions > and > > - limitations under the License. > > \ No newline at end of file > > + limitations under the License. > > + > > + > > +=========================================================== > ============ > > +Apache Pirk (incubating) Subcomponents: > > + > > +The Apache Pirk project contains subcomponents with separate > copyright > > +notices and license terms. Your use of the source code for the these > > +subcomponents is subject to the terms and conditions of the > following > > +licenses. > > + > > --- End diff -- > > > > I'm confused - how do we create different LICENSE and NOTICE files > > for the different jars when they are built via the release plugin? > > I'm guessing it requires some pom foo beyond my feeble capabilities :-( > I am not sure how u can package/not package license files in different artifacts. If this is a strict requirement, a good chunk of TLPs today are in violation of this. Should we have Justin McLean or John D. Ament from IPMC review our artifacts now? > > Besides stating the obvious that : > > (1) we'd store the source LICENSE and NOTICE file in the project > repository root, and place in there only the required information for > code we are hosting in our repo and including in the source.jar. For > Pirk as it is today, that will be a plain ALv2 text and simple notice. > > (2) we'd then have alternative LICENSE and NOTICE files for the > convenience "exe" JAR in a subdirectory that are used to replace the > top-level files when building the binaries. This would refer to the > license/ directory containing the full text of the 3rd-party licenses. > > Maybe our friends from Apache NiFi can explain what they do, as they > have the correct information in their release guide [1], and they are > Maven-based too. > > A number of other projects I peeked into don't seem to be doing the > right thing IMHO. > > [1] https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html > > Regards, > Tim >
