On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 5:17 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > PING
I'd also like to see this addressed. Licensing documentation for Incubator sample code should adhere to best practices. > On 28 November 2015 at 22:59, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 28 November 2015 at 16:26, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> +The following components included on this website are distributed under >>> MIT license : >>> + >>> +- Jekyll >>> +- Jekyll Bootstrap >>> +- Bootstrap >>> +- jQuery >>> + >>> +The MIT License (MIT): >>> + >>> +Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a >>> copy >>> +of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to >>> deal >>> +in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the >>> rights >>> +to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell >>> +copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is >>> +furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: >>> + >>> +The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in >>> all >>> +copies or substantial portions of the Software. >>> + >>> +THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR >>> +IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, >>> +FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE >>> +AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER >>> +LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING >>> FROM, >>> +OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN >>> THE >>> +SOFTWARE. >>> + >>> + >> >> The LICENSE looks OK. +1, it's OK, though I'd make one suggestion. The addition of the MIT license text minus the copyright notice (the intent is clearly to generalize so that it applies to 4 different dependencies) is a bit irregular. The copyright notice is an integral part of the MIT license -- it's actually a license template and is only completed when the copyright notice has the owner filled in. http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT To addresss the irregularity, I'd suggest either prepending the template line `Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>` -- or simply omitting the text of the MIT license, instead including filepath pointers to where the deps can be found in the distro. >>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/apache-website-template/blob/9e881e24/NOTICE >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> diff --git a/NOTICE b/NOTICE >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..a4fed15 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/NOTICE >>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> >> The ASF Copright header is missing >> >> See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice >> +1 Just the copyright notice, i.e. this: Apache [PRODUCT_NAME] Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation Actually, what should "[PRODUCT_NAME]" be in this case? >>> +This product includes software developed at >>> +The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). >>> + >> >> That paragraph is OK >> >>> +This product uses Jekyll software (http://jekyllrb.com/) >>> +Copyright (c) 2008-2015 Tom Preston-Werner >>> + >>> +This product includes Boostrap software (http://getbootstrap.com/) >>> +Copyright (c) 2011-2015 Twitter, Inc >>> + >>> +This product includes jQuery software (http://jquery.com/) >>> +Copyright jQuery Foundation and other contributors, https://jquery.org/ >> >> AFAICT these 3 attributions are NOT necessary for MIT licensed code, see >> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps +1, those should definitely be removed. Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
