Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-21 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
Hopefully fixed, i.e., I pushed the standard Apache license. That's all we need for the source release. Gj On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Thanks! Assumed that file was the same for all projects, will investigate > and fix. > > Gj

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
Thanks! Assumed that file was the same for all projects, will investigate and fix. Gj On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:38 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Just to give a bit of a hand > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/LICENSE#L277-L285 > - you don't need to

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread John D. Ament
Just to give a bit of a hand https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/LICENSE#L277-L285 - you don't need to repeat the apache license, if there's a NOTICE that needs to get replicated, HOWEVER, the paths to the files listed don't exist in this repo so its not really valid.

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
For the source release, in the top-level folder of incubator-netbeans, a LICENSE and NOTICE are now present: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-57 Gj On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:27 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > So far, I like the discussion I'm seeing happening

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread John D. Ament
So far, I like the discussion I'm seeing happening on list. The feedback from Ate and Bertrand makes a lot of sense. On 2017-09-20 09:38, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > Two things I don't understand right now, hope mentors can advise or someone > who knows: > 1.

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
Two things I don't understand right now, hope mentors can advise or someone who knows: 1. Is there any reason why we would not simply have one NOTICE and one LICENSE file, i.e., in the top level of incubator-netbeans. In other words, why and under what conditions would we want to have more than

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-20 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Jan Lahoda wrote: > ...if I understand it correctly, if a ('convenience') binary is created > for a subset of sources, then it should contain notices only for that > subset, right?... Ideally yes. Considering that binaries are not Apache

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-19 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
I believe that's correct based on the comments in this thread. Gj On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 at 12:10, Jan Lahoda wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Jan Lahoda

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-19 Thread Jan Lahoda
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote: > > ...I think we could enhance this with adding a > > "-notice.txt" attached to each library and adjusting the build to > produce

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-19 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
Hi, On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote: > ...I think we could enhance this with adding a > "-notice.txt" attached to each library and adjusting the build to produce a > composite LICENSE and NOTICE files based on data from modules that are > being built into the

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-19 Thread Jan Lahoda
So far, when I was thinking of this, my thoughts regarding external libraries were like this: AFAIK, currently, every external library is expected to have a "-license.txt" file attached (with the license of the given library), and the build is then merging them into a single file for the given

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-19 Thread Ate Douma
On 2017-09-19 06:16, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: Many thanks for all these details. Two things jump out at me: 1. "those NOTICE and LICENSE files *only* refer and apply to what has been checked into the (that!) git/subversion source tree, *nothing else*. So no references to 3rd party dependencies

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-18 Thread Geertjan Wielenga
Many thanks for all these details. Two things jump out at me: 1. "those NOTICE and LICENSE files *only* refer and apply to what has been checked into the (that!) git/subversion source tree, *nothing else*. So no references to 3rd party dependencies which are pulled in at build time!" That's very

Re: Assembling LICENSE and NOTICE

2017-09-18 Thread Ate Douma
On 2017-09-16 08:28, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: Hi all, Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-57. Trying to find an Apache project to use as reference point, looked around a bit, and Apache Spark seems to be complex enough in terms of its dependencies to follow: