On Jun 18, 2012, at 9:51 PM, Jun Rao wrote: > Kevin, > > Thanks for the comments. Just want to clarify on your points on > LICENSE/NOTICE. Our LICENSE/NOTICE covers all jars included in the source, > not those pulled in during building. We had a long discussion during our > 1st release and in the end, we have reached the conclusion that we don't > have to document LICENSE/NOTICE for jars not included in the source (since > we are just doing a source release). Please correct me if you think this is > blocking the release. We have to include a small number of jars in the > source because there is no easy way to pull them in automatically.
Hi Jun, Well, IMO, a source-only release does not free you from your responsibilities of creating/reviewing the licensing of what your build produces. Would it be ok if your source-only release builds binaries with artifacts that are not open source or an approved open source license? How am I expected to review your release if you can't/haven't documented your LICENSE/NOTICE files? Your users will expect to build Kafka (not simply use Kafka source). IMO, you have a responsibility/requirement to document the licensing of Kafka, not just the portions of Kafka (i.e. Kafka source code) that you choose to document. --kevan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
