Hi Alex,
Thanks for pushing this forward!
Once the grant is submitted to the ASF secretary we can push ahead
with the formal process. Thanks for filling in more of the wskdebug.xml; I
updated the version in the incubator svn repository to match.
For the license check, the critical list is the production
dependencies (what is required to run the released module). Dev
dependencies are not blockers because end users do not need dev
dependencies to use the released software. From your attached list the
production dependency licenses are:
- MIT: 99
- ISC: 20
- Apache-2.0: 8
- BSD-3-Clause: 3
- BSD-2-Clause: 3
- MIT*: 2
- Custom: http://github.com/substack/node-bufferlist: 1 (effectively MIT)
- AFLv2.1,BSD: 1
- Unlicense: 1
MIT, ISC, Apache-2.0, BSD-3-Clause, BSD-2-Clause, Unlicense, are all
"Category A" licenses [1]. All fine.
AFLv3.0 is a "Category A" license. AFLv2.1 is not listed in any category
at [1]. However, the one package with that license [2] is dual-licensed as
either BSD-3-Clause or AFLv2.1. Since BSD-3 is Category A, we are fine.
So, I see no license issues. Everything is Category-A.
--dave
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
[2] https://github.com/kriszyp/json-schema/blob/master/LICENSE
