Hi, On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 10:43 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are rather a lot of LICENSE and NOTICE files dotted around the > source archive.
That's in anticipation of the future release model that Sling is targetting. Instead of a big bang release like this or the previous release, Sling is planning to start releasing individual components separately. Each of these components will then need their own licensing information. Currently Sling includes licensing metadata both on the top level and on component level. > I would expect the top-level one to be a superset of the lower level > ones, but this is not the case as the top-level L &or N files don't > mention Rhino. The source archive does not contain Rhino code, so there's no need to mention it in the LICENSE or NOTICE files. > Binary archive > ========== > The LICENSE does not mention JSON or Rhino > The NOTICE file does not mention JSON or Rhino > > The nested binary archive contains a copy of Groovy and Jetty, neither > of which is credited anywhere as far as I can tell. I would expect at > least a mention in the LICENSE files, as these are not ASF projects. I noted this too [1], but I didn't consider this a blocking issue as the licensing information of all the embedded dependencies can be found inside the bundles packaged in resources/bundles within the top level binaries. For example, the Groovy licensing information can be found in resources/bundles/0/groovy-all-1.6.0.jar. It would of course be preferable if this information was included or at least referenced in the top level LICENSE and NOTICE files. [1] http://markmail.org/message/nn64fjgnmlxvqov6 BR, Jukka Zitting --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
