On 11.05.2015, at 09:41, Peter Klügl <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Some examples contain a NOTICE/LICENSE file, others not - why? > > This could be a problem. > > Before this rc, only UIMA Ruta projects (which are not built with maven) > contained these files. We had some discussion some time ago that these > project do not contain these files. I don't know if it is really > necessary (since they are only accessed as source and build no > artifacts) but it didn't hurt to add them. The only maven project > project ruta-ep-example-extensions specifies ruta-parent as parent und > thus should copy these files when built. > > Now there are some more projects that do not contain these files: > ruta-maven-example is a maven project, but specifies no parent at all > (files won't be copied). ruta-tutorial-GermanNovels is a some sort of > LaTeX project. No artifacts will be distributed for both project so I > hope that this could maybe not be a blocker? Since there is a LICENSE file covering the whole distro, I think the files in the individual examples are redundant and not necessary - unless the examples would not be ASL of course. >> Questions - Should the "TM" be for "Apache UIMA" or "Apache UIMA Ruta"? > > Good question. I also thought about it and we should probably start to > use it for Ruta. Did you notice any legal concerns when you introduced > it for uimaFIT? Should it be Apache UIMA (TM) Ruta (TM), which looks a > bit strange, or could we use Apache UIMA Ruta (TM)? What I gathered from keeping my ear to the ground regarding trademark issues was that: 1) we should attach "tm" to those things that we care about because only active use establishes the trademark 2) if we cared, we could ask the foundation to register a trademark I do not remember anybody complaining about using Apache uimaFIT (tm) at any point. >> The Spring JARs contain some sections in their LICENSE files not replicated >> in the LICENSE of the distribution / ruta engine JAR. These sections might >> not apply, but I wonder if anybody really checked if they do not apply. The >> Spring guys might just have copied stuff e.g. from ASM into Spring and >> spring-asm is in fact part of the ruta engine JAR. Sorry if this might have >> been discussed/observed before. > > Hmm, yes, there was a discussion, but I do not remember the details > right now. We had some iterations and, afterwards, I was quite confident > that the license file is correct. Maybe I even removed the mention again > after the discussion. The dependency first came with uimaFIT. How did > you handle it in the license file? Most of the uimaFIT license files do not contain these extra statements from the Spring JARs - because they do not contain code / binaries from the Spring JARs. The uimaFIT distro comes with a separate license file which contains these extra parts as the distro contains some Spring libraries. >> README file is still mentioning "uimaFIT JCasGenPomFriendly" - should be >> upgraded to the Apache UIMA jcasgen-maven-plugin. > > Some people could still use the old variant, but I asume that the > problem (double classes) could also occur with the maven plugin, right? The README tells us how to remove a problem, but not why it is caused ;) It looks like you are asking the use to only exclude Java files for the built-in Ruta types, not for any generated Ruta types. Is that correct? If so, couldn't the use tell the jcasgen-maven-plugin to avoid generating JCas classes for these in the first place, e.g. using either the "limitToProject" option or "typeSystemExcludes"? Additional issue: Link to the README in the previous release notes is dead: http://uima.apache.org/d/ruta-2.2.1/RELEASE_NOTES.html Cheers, -- Richard
