On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 21:11 +0100, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > sebb wrote: > > AIUI, the NOTICE file is not about dependencies, it is about the > > artefacts that are actually included in the distribution. > > > > In the case of Commons, dependencies are normally not included in the > > distribution, and should therefore not be included in NOTICE. > > Now I better understand why you feel the way you do about this. > > The approach that mrrp takes is to inform about software that is either > included *or* used by the current project. So it behaves differently > than you expect it to. I don't have much insight into the legal stuff > surrounding these files, but mrrp is used by lots of ASF project. So I > suspect that the generated NOTICE files comply with ASF policy.
In legal terms, things like "I don't have much insight into the legal stuff" and "I suspect that that generated NOTICE files comply.." worry me a lot. It also bothers me that "lots of projects" appear to have changed their legal process without asking on legal-discuss. Now I don't have much insight into legal issues either, and it may well be that you are right and I am wrong. But if processes are to be *changed*, then surely we need to validate the change before applying it. Just making changes to the legal processes without any expert opinion seems to be asking for trouble. Which projects are using mrrp auto-notice generation, and since when? Regards, Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
