On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> It simple I like that.
:)
As expressed in another thread, I believe simple rules are really helpful for
newcomers.
> It will also tend to make NOTICE
> files larger and that has a flow on effect to downstream projects.
This is only one s
As Justin has played a big role in shaping our LICENSE/NOTICE to this
point, I would most immediately lean on his advice here and just not add
the Jackson notice given that it's not well-formed. The fact that I can
now recognize a faulty NOTICE and question whether it should go in shows
that with
Hi,
> * The PMC is spared from performing analysis of dependency NOTICE content.
> * Verbatim aggregation can be achieved programmatically, allowing for
>automated solutions.
It simple I like that.
However there's probably no TLP or incubator project (with bundled Apache
licensed code)
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > I suspect 'relevant' means those parts of a NOTICE relating to the parts
> of
> > the product you use.
>
> Yes, that was the intent. That sentence references section 4d of the A
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I suspect 'relevant' means those parts of a NOTICE relating to the parts of
> the product you use.
Yes, that was the intent. That sentence references section 4d of the ALv2,
specifically this phrase:
excluding those notices that do not
I suspect 'relevant' means those parts of a NOTICE relating to the parts of
the product you use.
In this case you'd include the whole file (ie +1 to Marvin).
I suspect 'relevant' needs clarification in the docs.
Hen
On Friday, March 18, 2016, Stephen Mallette wrote:
> The Jackson JSON proce
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Stephen Mallette wrote:
> The Jackson JSON processing lib which is Apache 2.0 licensed carries this
> NOTICE file:
>8 snip 8<
> Does anyone have any advice on what portion of this is relevant for
> inclusion in a binary NOTICE file? Should it all be inclu
The Jackson JSON processing lib which is Apache 2.0 licensed carries this
NOTICE file:
--
# Jackson JSON processor
Jackson is a high-performance, Free/Open Source JSON processing library.
It was originally written by Tatu Saloranta (tatu.salora...@iki.fi),
HI,
I’m also not a lawyer, but I can't see anything in that NOTICE that would need
to copied across. If the notice was well formed it would have a copyright line
so perhaps just as that would follow the intent?
Remember the NOTICE contents effects downstream projects and it needs to be
keeps a
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:57:42 -0400
Stephen Mallette wrote:
> "If the dependency supplies a NOTICE file, its contents must be
> analyzed and the relevant portions bubbled up into the top-level
> NOTICE file."
With a NOTICE that length, why not include it complete?
The main thing I'd consider is r
10 matches
Mail list logo