Justin, Speaking from the NiFi side I can assure you an enormous amount of time, energy, and communication go into LICENSE and NOTICE handling for this project. We've had discussions with PMC and committers of other projects to learn their approach as well as to encourage them to follow these policies as well.
We attempt to adhere to both spirit and letter of policy regarding licensing and notice information. The NOTICE [1] you reference for us is only the source release NOTICE and I believe it to be correct for the source release. Can you share what you see is missing? We also maintain a notice that specifically applies to any convenance binaries we produce [2]. In fact, we also do that level of artifact specific NOTICE resolution for any bundling of dependencies we do (for example [3]). We produced and frequently reference this guide to help our community stay consistent with the policy as we understood/understand it [4]. And here you can see that we are pretty strict in following the understanding of the policy even when it deviates from otherwise accepted practice [5]. I very much welcome efforts to improve this guidance. I think some of the work Todd Lipcon has initiated recently is a great start. Now I write this realizing you are an excellent contributor to the licensing/notice discussions and you provided some of the best RC reviews in this area as well for us in incubation. So I write this fully respecting you just want things to be done right. if we're actually doing something wrong let us know and we'll sort it out. [1] https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/NOTICE [2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/nifi-assembly/NOTICE [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-hadoop-libraries-bundle/nifi-hadoop-libraries-nar/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE [4] https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-230 On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Justin Mclean <justinmcl...@me.com> wrote: > Hi > > It seems that some of the confusion comes from what top level projects have > done and not keep up with policy? From a 5 minute search (and not to pick on > / point out any particular project) here’s some examples were I think > improvement could be made to NOTICE files. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] > > Perhaps it's time to ask TLP to review their LICENCE / NOTICE to be a little > more consistent with current policy? Any suggestion on how we would go about > this? Does the policy need to be made clearer first? > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE > <https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE> > 2. https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/NOTICE > <https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/NOTICE> > 3. https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/NOTICE > <https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/NOTICE> > 4. https://github.com/apache/accumulo/blob/master/NOTICE > <https://github.com/apache/accumulo/blob/master/NOTICE> > 5. https://github.com/apache/camel/blob/master/NOTICE.txt > <https://github.com/apache/camel/blob/master/NOTICE.txt> > 6. https://github.com/apache/phoenix/blob/master/NOTICE > <https://github.com/apache/phoenix/blob/master/NOTICE> > 7. https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/lucene/NOTICE.txt > <https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/lucene/NOTICE.txt> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
