Also on [5] and [6] the license location is here https://github.com/syntagmatic/parallel-coordinates which includes divgrid.js in examples/lib as part of the package and from the same author.
Cheers Bolke Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > Op 26 apr. 2019 om 15:14 heeft Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> het > volgende geschreven: > > Additionally > > [3] Is CC-BY 4.0 as mentioned > [4] is in licenses/ and states the correct license. > [5] [6] ([6] is equal to [9]) are from the same author and the correct > license (BSD-3) is included in licenses/ (see also: > http://bl.ocks.org/syntagmatic/3150059 - scroll down please). > > All above licenses are mentioned in LICENSE.txt > > Other items I leave up to the release manager to answer. > > Bolke. > > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > >> Op 26 apr. 2019 om 10:03 heeft Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> het >> volgende geschreven: >> >> Hi Justin, >> >> The GIS data is under CC BY 4.0 see here: >> >> https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=supplementary&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0151586.s002 >> >> Hence the reference to this license. According to >> https://apache.org/legal/resolved.html it is fine to include this in binary >> form (whether it can be as part of a source release I leave that up to you, >> it’s a bit of a grey area to me in this case). >> >> Cheers >> Bolke >> >> >> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad >> >>> Op 26 apr. 2019 om 06:20 heeft Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> het >>> volgende geschreven: >>> >>> Hi Justin >>> >>> I mean these two are very important and should be fixed. Sorry for not >>> clear enough. >>> >>> Sheng Wu 吴晟 >>> >>> Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin >>> Twitter, wusheng1108 >>> >>> >>> Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> 于2019年4月26日周五 下午12:16写道： >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> It a little unclear to me if your are commenting on the release check list >>>> or the Superset release here. >>>> >>>>> 1. Missing licensing information >>>> >>>> Well IMO it depends on the serenity IMO missing one or two MIT or BSD >>>> licenses in a podling release is generally a fix next release type of issue >>>> as they are permissive licenses and often the license is included (as a >>>> header) just not clearly indicated that’s it’s included, so it’s more an >>>> ASF policy issue than an actual licensing issue. >>>> >>>>> 2. Source release may contained compiled code >>>> >>>> I’m still not sure it can. In the past I’ve alway voted -1 on this issue, >>>> but it's recently been suggested, that we go easier on podlings releases >>>> particularly their first one. It is still however unknown if the board (who >>>> are responsible for release policy) or infra (who are responsible for >>>> distribution policy) would actually allow this. So far that exact situation >>>> has not come and I not been able to get a clear answer from others on this. >>>> The incubator (and its PMC) don’t set those policies. [1][2] >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Justin >>>> >>>> 1. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html >>>> 2. https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>>> >>>>
