Ignore me please. Wrong list. But it might be worth running RAT on the AOOo tree, to get a feel for the tool and the results.
http://incubator.apache.org/rat/ -Rob On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > To see how much work we have on IP clearance, I ran RAT, with results here: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/pmc/ip-clearance/rat.txt > > Most of the issues flagged fall into these categories: > > 1. Test documents, in ODF format. I'm not sure what we can do about > them. We could put the license in the documents as metadata. But RAT > wouldn't know how to find the license in the metadata. Of course, in > the future RAT could be enhanced, to use the ODF Toolkit to find this > license. Or we could just treat test documents as binary files. > > 2. Maven's pom.xml -- we could add license as an XML comment? > > 3. ODF's schema files, in Relax NG format. These are copyright by > OASIS, the consortium where ODF is standardized. The notice in the > schema is shown here: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/trunk/generator/schema2template/src/main/resources/examples/odf/OpenDocument-v1.2-csprd03-schema.rng > > This is used as input to the code generation, which is a build-time > process that generates a portion of the Java code directly from the > ODF schema. So the schema definition document is not part of the > runtime, though it would be part of our source code release. > > Note that this schema definition is not under an open source software > license, but it does have a license that allows unrestricted use, > redistribution, etc. as well as creation of derived works. But it > does have a restriction on modifications. > > I assume we'll need to take this to legal-discuss to get this classified. > > > 4. Some configuration files, .properties, .vm, etc. We should be able > to add a license notice there. > > 5. A few Java files that lack a license header. I think we should > check their history in Hg, and establish their provenance. > > > -Rob >
