Yes, the issue of where 3rd-party license information goes is different, and varies by license. I think the BSD/MIT licenses are all already listed in LICENSE accordingly. Let me know if you spy an omission.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Richard Hillegas <rhil...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Thanks for that pointer, Sean. It may be that Derby is putting the license > information in the wrong place, viz. in the NOTICE file. But the 3rd party > license text may need to go somewhere else. See for instance the advice a > little further up the page at > http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps > > Thanks, > -Rick > > Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote on 09/24/2015 12:07:01 PM: > >> From: Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> >> To: Richard Hillegas/San Francisco/IBM@IBMUS >> Cc: "dev@spark.apache.org" <dev@spark.apache.org> >> Date: 09/24/2015 12:08 PM >> Subject: Re: [Discuss] NOTICE file for transitive "NOTICE"s > > >> >> Have a look at http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice >> though, which makes a good point about limiting what goes into NOTICE >> to what is required. That's what makes me think we shouldn't do this. >> >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Richard Hillegas <rhil...@us.ibm.com> >> wrote: >> > To answer Sean's question on the previous email thread, I would propose >> > making changes like the following to the NOTICE file: >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
