-----Original Message----- >From: Franklin, Matthew B. [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:49 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Next 0.8-incubating release: LICENSE and NOTICE >requirements > ><snip> > >>>I think I've just finished with the NOTICE (and some LICENSE) >>>modifications >>>needed for rave-shindig. >>>Quite some changes which I tried to do as much as atomic as possible so >>>everybody can review why I did many removals and additions/changes. >>> >>>@Matt: I don't expect to have much or even any time tomorrow to >continue >>>with >>>the same work needed for rave-portal, but Wednesday I probably can help >>>or dive >>>into it myself. >> >>I am working on it now and hope to have everything in rave-portal wrapped >>up by tomorrow evening > ></snip> > >After reading through the legal discuss JIRA tickets and some of the >background info on this issue, it is clear that we only need to include >attributions in the NOTICE file that are required by the license, which is >something we have discussed before. > >However, there is no definitive guide as to which licenses require attribution >in the NOTICE files and which do not. Some, are very self-explanatory, but >others are not. One specifically is the ASL 2.0, which states > > If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its > distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must > include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained > within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not > pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one > of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed > as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or > documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, > within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and > wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents > of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and > do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution > notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside > or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided > that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed > as modifying the License. > >This indicates, to me at least, that any NOTICES contained in any dependency >we package need to be concatenated to our NOTICE file; which will result in >more attributions, not less based on what I have found. I don't know if EPL or >CDDL have similar provisions, but I will need to read to get a better idea. > >My strategy now is to gather and concatenate any NOTICE files in our >dependencies and simply add them to our own. A rough cut from a script I >wrote is attached to this e-mail.
Or not. Here are links: http://people.apache.org/~mfranklin/LICENSE_COMBINED http://people.apache.org/~mfranklin/NOTICE_COMBINED > >Does everyone agree this is the correct approach or should I take this back to >legal?
