[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-267?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16277170#comment-16277170
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on ORC-267:
------------------------------------
Github user jcrist commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/193
From http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new it looks like they
recommend storing `LICENSE` and `NOTICE` in the root of the tar archive of a
distribution (as you've done here). Unfortunately cpack doesn't make it easy to
distinguish between files in `make install` and `make package`.
Neither `parquet-cpp` nor `arrow` include `LICENSE` or `NOTICE` on `make
install` or `make package` (`parquet-cpp` only, arrow doesn't use `cpack`). For
at least the python wrappers for these libraries, the actual release artifacts
are generated via an external tool that adds in the LICENSE stuff.
This separation of build/package makes sense to me, but may not for this
project (not sure how y'all handle releases). Perhaps the LICENSE/NOTICE could
be added to the `tar.gz` file after `make package` manually via another make
target? Adding to `doc/orc/{NOTICE,LICENSE}` might be equally fine? I'm not
really sure what's best here, either is fine with me.
> Restore NOTICES and LICENSE to binary tarball
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ORC-267
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-267
> Project: ORC
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Owen O'Malley
> Assignee: Deepak Majeti
> Fix For: 1.5.0
>
>
> We need to distribute the NOTICE and LICENSE file with the binary
> distribution, but they were removed by ORC-266.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
