It looks like it is also possible to have
src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/LICENSE and
src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/NOTICE that will be appended to the
default. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3990 and these
examples:

https://github.com/apache/accumulo/tree/master/server/monitor/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF
https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/master/hbase-thrift/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF

This is for jars; it's also easy to adjust L&N for assemblies (tars and
zips) because you're explicitly listing files to include in the assembly
spec.

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Tim Ellison <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 17/08/16 16:08, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > I'm seeing the same LICENSE and NOTICE files used throughout NiFi - even
> in
> > the nifi-assembly directory which is referenced here
> > https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html
>
> FWIW the LICENSE I see in "nifi-1.0.0-BETA-source-release.zip" is quite
> different to that in "nifi-1.0.0-BETA-bin.tar.gz".  So they have figured
> it out.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> > Joe - Am I missing something here?
> >
> > I would echo Suneel and ask if (1) it is really a strict requirement for
> > our sources jar and/or (2) if we are interpreting it correctly.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 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
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to