On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 2:35 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/04/2008, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Apr 10, 2008, at 8:42 PM, Luciano Resende wrote: > > > > > > > The files that have this license are listed in the LICENSE [1] file > > > (search for "Apache Tuscany SDO for Java Subcomponents") and I also > > > see a mention of osoa.org in the NOTICE [2]. > > > > > > Is this what you were looking for ? > > > > > > > For files without src license headers, I was referring to files like: > > > > > > > ==C:/Tuscany/Distros/SDO/1.1-rc4a/tuscany-sdo-1.1-incubating-src/impl/model/SDO.mdl > > > > > ==C:/Tuscany/Distros/SDO/1.1-rc4a/tuscany-sdo-1.1-incubating-src/impl/src/test/resources/customer1.xml > > ... > > > > Looks like most are test files. I won't quibble much about the test > files. > > Easiest (in the long run) to add license headers, IMO. Not sure what to > make > > of the SDO.mdl file. > > > > Yes, I saw the simple osoa.org attribution in the notice file. However, > IMO > > that is not sufficient. I think the NOTICE should contain the copyright > info > > and I believe the OSOA license requires it. From the OSOA license: > > > > 1. A link or URL to the Artifacts at this location: > > http://www.osoa.org/display/Main/Service+Data+Objects+Specifications > > > > 2. The full text of this copyright notice as shown in the Artifacts. > > > > I would add both of those to the NOTICE file. > > > > The NOTICE file is for attributions only. > > The rest goes in the LICENSE file, as has already been done
This was our understanding too which is why its been changed to be this way. Have these replies clarified things enough, any further comments...or votes? ...ant
