rmetzger commented on a change in pull request #88: Licensing final fixes / 
touches for 2.0.0
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/88#discussion_r401410263
 
 

 ##########
 File path: 
statefun-examples/statefun-ridesharing-example/statefun-ridesharing-example-simulator/src/main/resources/META-INF/licenses/LICENSE.javax.annotation-api
 ##########
 @@ -360,400 +360,3 @@ litigation relating to this License shall be subject to 
the jurisdiction
 of the Federal Courts of the Northern District of California and the
 state courts of the State of California, with venue lying in Santa Clara
 County, California.
-
 
 Review comment:
   I'm not an expert, but here's my opinion:
   
   I don't feel comfortable editing a license we are forwarding:
   The CDDL states 
   ```
   Except as provided in Section 4.3, no one other than the license steward has 
the right to modify this License.
   ```
   I'm not sure if "this License" means only the CDDL, or the LICENSE file of 
javax annotation api.
   
   Why can't we forward the javax annotation api LICENSE file (unmodified, as 
requested by the license), but state in our NOTICE file, that we are using the 
javax annotation api under the terms of the CDDL?
   
   I believe this approach is less risky (remember `Oracle is the initial 
license steward`)

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Reply via email to