Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 03.06.2008, 15:01 +0200 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > ...I just looked at the NOTICE file in the engine and see that it includes
> > references to SLF4J and jcp.org. Interestingly neither is included in
> > the engine....
> 
> Both of these have scope=provided, and right now the mknotice script
> takes as input the output of mvn dependency:resolve, grepped to remove
> scope=test.
> 
> In theory we could exclude the provided stuff from the NOTICE, as we
> do not redistribute it in this module.
> 
> But the dependencies having scope=provided are also sometimes included
> in the generated bundles, by way of the private-package
> maven-bundle-plugin statement, right?

Yes, this is in fact a problem. One solution I could see is, that we
mark all dependencies, which are included in a bundle as optional. This
is done for the launchpad/app module to not include all dependencies and
transitives into a project's dependency list when adding app as a
dependency.

Like that we could depend on the optionality setting for adding the
notice line. Not sure, whether this actually already works.

> 
> If we can change that (and enforce it, for example by the
> maven-bundle-plugin refusing to include dependencies with
> scope=provided, and/or inventing a new scope for that) we could ignore
> provided dependencies in the mknotice script.
> 
> For now, I'd suggest leaving things as is (unless I'm wrong about our
> use of "provided"). As you indicate that means including too much
> stuff in the NOTICE files sometimes, which is probably better than too
> little, at least for this first release.

Agreed. Let's go with what we have.

Regards
Felix

Reply via email to