I'm going to +1 this myself. Tested on my laptop.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote: > I forked a new thread for this. Please discuss NOTICE file related things > there so it doesn't hijack this thread. > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Richard Hillegas <rhil...@us.ibm.com> >> wrote: >> > Under your guidance, I would be happy to help compile a NOTICE file >> which >> > follows the pattern used by Derby and the JDK. This effort might >> proceed in >> > parallel with vetting 1.5.1 and could be targeted at a later release >> > vehicle. I don't think that the ASF's exposure is greatly increased by >> one >> > more release which follows the old pattern. >> >> I'd prefer to use the ASF's preferred pattern, no? That's what we've >> been trying to do and seems like we're even required to do so, not >> follow a different convention. There is some specific guidance there >> about what to add, and not add, to these files. Specifically, because >> the AL2 requires downstream projects to embed the contents of NOTICE, >> the guidance is to only include elements in NOTICE that must appear >> there. >> >> Put it this way -- what would you like to change specifically? (you >> can start another thread for that) >> >> >> My assessment (just looked before I saw Sean's email) is the same as >> >> his. The NOTICE file embeds other projects' licenses. >> > >> > This may be where our perspectives diverge. I did not find those >> licenses >> > embedded in the NOTICE file. As I see it, the licenses are cited but not >> > included. >> >> Pretty sure that was meant to say that NOTICE embeds other projects' >> "notices", not licenses. And those notices can have all kinds of >> stuff, including licenses. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org >> >> >
