On 04/09/2009, Todd Volkert <tvolk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The NOTICE file contains items which should not be there, i.e. Tomcat. > > > > > The servlet implementation could come from a number of places. We > originally didn't mention it in the NOTICE file, but it got caught as > something that needed to be there in our 1.1 release to remove any ambiguity > as to which implementation we're using and whether we're legally allowed to > do so. So it must stay. Are there any other items that you think should > not be there? > > > > > Also - a minor point - the ========= dividers are unnecessary (the > > NOTICE file should be as short as possible). > > > > > That's a stylistic choice -- we did it to increase readability. It > certainly should have no bearing on a release vote. > > > > > The LICENSE file does not contain the full CCA LICENSE for the Silk > > icons; see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/legalcode for > > the full text. > > > > > Good to know - I'll update it on the trunk. Given that we got it from > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/, which is the license linked to > off the silk icon home page, should this block a release?
Yes, because it's not actually the license. > > For 3rd party libraries which use the AL 2.0 license (e.g. Smack & > > Groovy) for completeness this should be noted in the LICENSE file. > > > > > the NOTICE file says which items are Apache 2.0 licensed, and the LICENSE > file contains the Apache 2.0 license text. Is this not sufficient? It would make life a lot easier for users (and reviewers) if the LICENSE file had the complete list. > > > > The LICENSE file should note the name of the license, as well as > > including the text. > > The URL would be helpful. > > > > > Not a bad idea, but certainly not a requirement. For quick reference, I > looked at httpd's LICENSE file, and they don't do this ( > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE). > > > The NOTICE file mentions VMWare, but fails to mention any associated > > license. > > > > > That's because VMware maintains a copyright ownership over the code > contributed to the ASF, as described in the "Overview" and "Source File > Headers for Code Developed at the ASF" sections of the ASF Source Header and > Copyright Notice Policy (http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html). > This copyright notice is pursuant to ASF copyright notice policy. That's why there is a mention in the NOTICE file, but surely there must be some license associated with the VMWare code? What is it, and where is it? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
