On 17/12/2007, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 17, 2007 5:49 PM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Your interpretation works if your subversion repository is not a > > "distribution". IMO, it is and should contain appropriate license/ > > notice/disclaimer. > >
I agree with Kevan. > I don't agree with this standpoint as for instance the LICENSE and > DISCLAIMER docs can be automatically included into the correct distribution > location from officially released bundles. This makes much more sense as it > keeps the definition of those documents in one place. This process is > repeatable using maven. > IMO SVN does not have to mirror an unzipped release (there is no policy > directing that, or if there is, please provide a link), as long as it is > reproducible from the release tag. > I have asked about this on the legal discuss list. Regardless of the outcome, I think that there are problems with generating the NOTICE and LICENSE files automatically. Unless the project is pure ASF, there are additional items that may need to be added to the N & L files. In any case, I think it's important that these files are carefully considered to ensure that the required entries are present. This is difficult if not impossible if the contents of the N & L files are automatically generated. The N & L files are unlikely to change frequently, so it really does not save much work (if any) to create them by hand. Having them in the top-level SVN directory seems sensible to me. > Martijn > > -- > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst > Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc2 is released > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-rc1/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
