Jörn Kottmann wrote:
1) You can distribute binaries (but not sources) of things that are
EPL <http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php> (Eclipse Public
License) licensed, as long as the notice file identifies these and
provides a link to the source for these. (This requirement comes from
the EPL license).
Ignoring the version differences, what specific source code files are
you incorporating?
The cas editor should be packaged togehter with the eclipse rcp runtime.
The rcp runtime contains mostly binary files, but maybe some files are
classified as source files
like scripts or config files. I am not sure.
I think its ok to include the rcp runtime in the release togehter with
an appropriate entry in the
notice file (thats what the apache directory studio guys have done).
If you would like to take a look at the whole package I can go forward
and build the first
release candidate.
Jörn
The RCP runtime should be ok, classified as binary. So I guess we should
be looking at having more than one NOTICE file for the CAS editor. The
one that goes with the source distribution (every Apache project must have
a source distribution) should not have the mention of Eclipse code, because
it's only part of the binary distribution (at least that's what I'm
guessing). Right?
--Thilo
