If it is not against the Apache Guidelines I would vote for removing them. I'm always in favour of keeping things simple.
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 at 18:34 Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I just updated our LICENSE of the binary distribution and noticed that we > also list dependencies which are licensed under Apache-2.0. As far as I > understand the ASF guidelines [1], this is not strictly necessary. Since it > is a lot of work to keep the list up to date, I was wondering whether we > want to remove Apache-2.0 dependencies from this list or not. I would be in > favour of this if it does not contradict an ASF policy which I miss. > > This might even have another advantage. Currently, we're shading in many > modules the Guava and ASM dependency away. Thus their binary data is > contained in nearly every jar we publish on maven. If we wanted to be > consistent with our license policy then we would have to add in each of > these jars a LICENSE/NOTICE file which lists these two dependencies, IMO. > > Cheers, > Till > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice >
